ΠΛΟΥΤΑΡΧΟΣ, Περὶ Ἴσιδος καὶ Ὀσίριδος & Περὶ τοῦ Ἐμφαινομένου Προσώπου

     1. … Ὁ Σύλλας “ταῦτ’” εἶπε· “τῷ γὰρ ἐμῷ μύθῳ προσήκει κἀκεῖθέν ἐστι· ἀλλ’ εἰ δή τι πρὸς τὰς ἀνὰ χεῖρα ταύτας καὶ διὰ στόματος πᾶσι δόξας περὶ τοῦ προσώπου τῆς σελήνης προανεκρούσασθε, πρῶτον ἡδέως ἄν μοι δοκῶ πυθέσθαι”. “Τί δ’ οὐκ ἐμέλλομεν”, εἶπον, “ὑπὸ τῆς ἐν τούτοις ἀπορίας ἐπ’ ἐκεῖνα ἀπωσθέντες; ὡς γὰρ οἱ ἐν νοσήμασι χρονίοις πρὸς τὰ κοινὰ βοηθήματα καὶ τὰς συνήθεις διαίτας ἀπειπόντες ἐπὶ καθαρμοὺς καὶ περίαπτα καὶ ὀνείρους τρέπονται, οὕτως ἀναγκαῖον ἐν δυσθεωρήτοις καὶ ἀπόροις σκέψεσιν, ὅταν οἱ κοινοὶ καὶ ἔνδοξοι καὶ συνήθεις λόγοι μὴ πείθωσι, πειρᾶσθαι τῶν ἀτοπωτέρων καὶ μὴ καταφρονεῖν ἀλλ’ ἐπᾴδειν ἀτεχνῶς ἑαυτοῖς τὰ τῶν παλαιῶν καὶ διὰ πάντων τἀληθὲς ἐξελέγχειν.

     1. … These were Sulla’s words ¹. “For it concerns my story and that is its source; but I think that I should first like to learn whether there is any need to put back for a fresh start ² to those opinions concerning the face of the moon which are current and on the lips of everyone”. “What else would you expect us to have done”, I said ³, “since it was the difficulty in these opinions that drove us from our course upon those others? As people with chronic diseases when they have despaired of ordinary remedies and customary regimens turn to expiations and amulets and dreams, just so in obscure and perplexing speculations, when the ordinary and reputable and customary accounts are not persuasive, it is necessary to try those that are more out of the way and not scorn them but literally to chant over ourselves ⁴ the charms of the ancients and use every means to bring the truth to test.

     2. Ὁρᾷς γὰρ εὐθὺς ὡς ἄτοπος ὁ λέγων τὸ φαινόμενον εἶδος ἐν τῇ σελήνῃ πάθος εἶναι τῆς ὄψεως ὑπεικούσης τῇ λαμπρότητι δι’ ἀσθένειαν, ὃ μαρμαρυγὴν καλοῦμεν, οὐ συνορῶν ὅτι πρὸς τὸν ἥλιον ἔδει τοῦτο γίνεσθαι μᾶλλον ὀξὺν ἀπαντῶντα καὶ πλήκτην –ὥς που καὶ Ἐμπεδοκλῆς ^α τὴν ἑκατέρων ἀποδίδωσιν οὐκ ἀηδῶς διαφοράν

Ἥλιος ὀξυβελὴς ἠδ’ ἱλάειρα Σελήνη,

τὸ ἐπαγωγὸν αὐτῆς καὶ ἱλαρὸν καὶ ἄλυπον οὕτως προσαγορεύσας–, ἔπειτα λόγον ἀποδιδούς, καθ’ ὃν αἱ ἀμυδραὶ καὶ ἀσθενεῖς ὄψεις οὐδεμίαν διαφορὰν ἐν τῇ σελήνῃ μορφῆς ἐνορῶσιν, ἀλλὰ λεῖος αὐταῖς ἀντιλάμπει καὶ περίπλεως αὐτῆς ὁ κύκλος, οἱ δ’ ὀξὺ καὶ σφοδρὸν ὁρῶντες ἐξακριβοῦσι μᾶλλον καὶ διαστέλλουσιν ἐκτυπούμενα τὰ εἴδη τοῦ προσώπου καὶ τῆς διαφορᾶς ἅπτονται σαφέστερον· ἔδει γὰρ οἶμαι τοὐναντίον, εἴπερ ἡττωμένου πάθος ὄμματος ἐποίει τὴν φαντασίαν, ὅπου τὸ πάσχον ἀσθενέστερον, σαφέστερον εἶναι τὸ φαινόμενον. Ἡ δ’ ἀνωμαλία καὶ παντάπασιν ἐλέγχει τὸν λόγον· οὐ γὰρ ἔστι συνεχοῦς σκιᾶς καὶ συγκεχυμένης ὄψις, ἀλλ’ οὐ φαύλως ὑπογράφων ὁ Ἀγησιάναξ εἴρηκε

πᾶσα μὲν ἥδε πέριξ πυρὶ λάμπεται, ἐν δ’ ἄρα μέσσῃ
γλαυκότερον κυάνοιο φαείνεται ἠύτε κούρης
ὄμμα καὶ ὑγρὰ μέτωπα· τὰ δὲ ῥέθει ἄντα ἔοικεν·

ὄντως γὰρ ὑποδύεται περιόντα τοῖς λαμπροῖς τὰ σκιερὰ καὶ πιέζει πιεζόμενα πάλιν ὑπ’ αὐτῶν καὶ ἀποκοπτόμενα, καὶ ὅλως πέπλεκται δι’ ἀλλήλων, … γραφικὴν τὴν διατύπωσιν εἶναι τοῦ σχήματος. Ταὐτὸ δὲ καὶ πρὸς Κλέαρχον, ὦ Ἀριστότελες, οὐκ ἀπιθάνως ἐδόκει λέγεσθαι τὸν ὑμέτερον· ὑμέτερος γὰρ ἁνήρ, Ἀριστοτέλους τοῦ παλαιοῦ γεγονὼς συνήθης, εἰ καὶ πολλὰ τοῦ Περιπάτου παρέτρεψεν”.

     2. Well, to begin with, you see that it is absurd to call the figure seen in the moon an affection of vision in its feebleness giving way to brilliance, a condition which we call bedazzlement. Anyone who asserts this ⁵ does not observe that this phenomenon should rather have occurred in relation to the sun, since the sun lights upon us keen and violent (as Empedocles ⁶ too somewhere not infelicitously renders the difference of the two:

The sun keen-shafted and the gentle moon,

referring in this way to her allurement and cheerfulness and harmlessness), and moreover does not explain why dull and weak eyes discern no distinction of shape in the moon but her orb for them has an even and full light, whereas those of keen and robust vision make out more precisely and distinctly the pattern of facial features and more clearly perceive the variations. In fact the contrary, I think, should have been the case if the image resulted from an affection of the eye when it is overpowered: the weaker the subject affected, the clearer should be the appearance of the image. The unevenness also entirely refutes the hypothesis, for the shadow that one sees is not continuous and confused but is not badly depicted by the words of Agesianax ⁷:

She gleams with fire encircled, but within
Bluer than lapis show a maiden’s eye
And dainty brow, a visage manifest.

In truth, the dark patches submerge beneath the bright ones which they encompass and confine them, being confined and curtailed by them in turn; and they are thoroughly intertwined with each other so as to make the delineation of the figure resemble a painting. This, Aristotle, seemed ⁸ to be a point not without cogency against your Clearchus ⁹ also. For the man is yours, since he was an associate of the ancient Aristotle, although he did pervert many doctrines of the School” ¹⁰.

     3. Ὑπολαβόντος δὲ τοῦ Ἀπολλωνίδου τὸν λόγον καὶ τίς ἦν ἡ δόξα τοῦ Κλεάρχου διαπυθομένου “παντὶ μᾶλλον” ἔφην “ἀγνοεῖν ἢ σοὶ προσῆκόν ἐστι λόγον ὥσπερ ἀφ’ ἑστίας τῆς γεωμετρίας ὁρμώμενον. Λέγει γὰρ ἁνὴρ εἰκόνας ἐσοπτρικὰς εἶναι καὶ εἴδωλα τῆς μεγάλης θαλάσσης ἐμφαινόμενα τῇ σελήνῃ τὸ καλούμενον πρόσωπον. Ἥ τε γὰρ ἀκτὶς ἀνακλωμένη πολλαχόθεν ἅπτεσθαι τῶν οὐ κατ’ εὐθυωρίαν ὁρωμένων πέφυκεν, ἥ τε πανσέληνος αὐτὴ πάντων ἐσόπτρων ὁμαλότητι καὶ στιλπνότητι κάλλιστόν ἐστι καὶ καθαρώτατον. Ὥσπερ οὖν τὴν ἶριν οἴεσθ’ ὑμεῖς ἀνακλωμένης ἐπὶ τὸν ἥλιον τῆς ὄψεως ἐνορᾶσθαι τῷ νέφει λαβόντι νοτερὰν ἡσυχῇ λειότητα καὶ πῆξιν, οὕτως ἐκεῖνος ἐνορᾶσθαι τῇ σελήνῃ τὴν ἔξω θάλασσαν οὐκ ἐφ’ ἧς ἐστι χώρας, ἀλλ’ ὅθεν ἡ κλάσις ἐποίησε τῇ ὄψει τὴν ἐπαφὴν αὐτῆς καὶ τὴν ἀνταύγειαν· ὥς που πάλιν ὁ Ἀγησιάναξ εἴρηκεν

ᾗ πόντου μέγα κῦμα καταντία κυμαίνοντος
δείκελον ἰνδάλλοιτο πυριφλεγέθοντος ἐσόπτρου”.

     3. Apollonides broke in and inquired what the opinion of Clearchus was. “You are the last person”, I said, “who has any right not to know a theory of which geometry is, as it were, the very hearth and home. The man, you see, asserts that what is called the face consists of mirrored likenesses, that is images of the great ocean reflected in the moon ¹¹, for the visual ray when reflected naturally reaches from many points objects which are not directly visible and the full moon is itself in uniformity and lustre ¹² the finest and clearest of all mirrors. Just as you think, then, that the reflection of the visual ray to the sun accounts for the appearance of the rainbow in a cloud where the moisture has become somewhat smooth and condensed ¹³, so Clearchus thought that the outer ocean is seen in the moon, not in the place where it is but in the place whence the visual ray has been deflected to the ocean and the reflection of the ocean to us. So Agesianax again has somewhere said:

Or swell of ocean surging opposite
Be mirrored in a looking-glass of flame” ¹⁴.

     4. Ἡσθεὶς οὖν ὁ Ἀπολλωνίδης “ὡς ἴδιον” εἶπε “καὶ καινὸν ὅλως τὸ σκευώρημα τῆς δόξης, τόλμαν δέ τινα καὶ μοῦσαν ἔχοντος ἀνδρός· ἀλλὰ πῆ τὸν ἔλεγχον αὐτῷ προσῆγε”; “Πρῶτον μέν” εἶπον, “ᾗ μία φύσις τῆς ἔξω θαλάσσης ἐστί, σύρρουν καὶ συνεχὲς κύκλῳ πέλαγος, ἡ δ’ ἔμφασις οὐ μία τῶν ἐν τῇ σελήνῃ μελασμάτων, ἀλλ’ οἷον ἰσθμοὺς ἔχουσα, τοῦ λαμπροῦ διαιροῦντος καὶ διορίζοντος τὸ σκιερόν· ὅθεν ἑκάστου τόπου χωρισθέντος καὶ πέρας ἴδιον ἔχοντος αἱ τῶν φωτεινῶν ἐπιβολαὶ τοῖς σκοτεινοῖς ὕψους εἰκόνα καὶ βάθους λαμβάνουσαι τὰς περὶ τὰ ὄμματα καὶ τὰ χείλη φαινομένας εἰκόνας ὁμοιότατα διετύπωσαν· ὥστ’ ἢ πλείονας ἔξω θαλάσσας ὑποληπτέον ἰσθμοῖς τισι καὶ ἠπείροις ἀπολαμβανομένας, ὅπερ ἐστὶν ἄτοπον καὶ ψεῦδος, ἢ μιᾶς οὔσης οὐ πιθανὸν εἰκόνα διεσπασμένην οὕτως ἐμφαίνεσθαι.

     Ἐκεῖνο μὲν γὰρ ἐρωτῶν ἀσφαλέστερόν ἐστιν ἢ ἀποφαίνεσθαι σοῦ παρόντος, εἰ τῆς οἰκουμένης εὖρος τοσαύτης καὶ μῆκος ἐνδέχεται πᾶσιν ὡσαύτως ἀπὸ τῆς σελήνης ὄψιν ἀνακλωμένην ἐπιθιγγάνειν τῆς θαλάσσης, καὶ τοῖς ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ μεγάλῃ θαλάττῃ πλέουσι νὴ Δία καὶ οἰκοῦσιν, ὥσπερ Βρεττανοῖς, καὶ ταῦτα μηδὲ τῆς γῆς, ὥς φατε, πρὸς τὴν σφαῖραν τῆς σελήνης κέντρου λόγον ἐπεχούσης. Τουτὶ μὲν οὖν” ἔφην “σὸν ἔργον ἐπισκοπεῖν, τὴν δὲ πρὸς τὴν σελήνην ἢ τῆς ὄψεως κλάσιν οὐκέτι σὸν οὐδ’ Ἱππάρχου· καίτοι γε φιλοπράγμων ἁνήρ· ἀλλὰ πολλοῖς οὐκ ἀρέσκει φυσιολογῶν περὶ τῆς ὄψεως. Ὡς αὐτὴν ὁμοπαθῆ κρᾶσιν ἴσχειν καὶ σύμπηξιν εἰκός ἐστι μᾶλλον ἢ πληγάς τινας καὶ ἀποπηδήσεις, οἵας ἔπλαττε τῶν ἀτόμων Ἐπίκουρος. Οὐκ ἐθελήσει δ’ οἶμαι τὴν σελήνην ἐμβριθὲς ὑποθέσθαι σῶμα καὶ στερεὸν ὑμῖν ὁ Κλέαρχος, ἀλλ’ ἄστρον αἰθέριον καὶ φωσφόρον, ὥς φατε· τοιαύτῃ δὲ τὴν ὄψιν ἢ θραύειν προσήκει ἢ ἀποστρέφειν, ὥστ’ οἴχεσθαι τὴν ἀνάκλασιν. Εἰ δὲ προσαμυνεῖταί τις ἡμᾶς, ἐρησόμεθα πῶς μόνον πρόσωπόν ἐστιν ἐν τῇ σελήνῃ τὸ τῆς θαλάσσης ἔσοπτρον, ἄλλῳ δ’ οὐδενὶ τῶν τοσούτων ἀστέρων ἐνορᾶται· καίτοι τό γ’ εἰκὸς ἀπαιτεῖ πρὸς ἅπαντας ἢ πρὸς μηθένα τοῦτο πάσχειν τὴν ὄψιν. Ἀλλ’ …” πρὸς τὸν Λεύκιον ἔφην ἀποβλέψας, “ὃ πρῶτον ἐλέχθη τῶν ἡμετέρων ὑπόμνησον”.

     4. Apollonides was delighted. “What an original and absolutely novel contrivance the hypothesis is”, he said, “the work of a man of daring and culture; but how did you proceed to bring your counter-argument against it”? “In the first place”, I said, “in that, although the outer ocean is a single thing, a confluent and continuous sea ¹⁵, the dark spots in the moon do not appear as one buts having something like isthmuses between them, the brilliance dividing and delimiting the shadow. Hence, since each part is separated and has its own boundary, the layers of light upon shadow ¹⁶, assuming the semblance of height and depth, have produced a very close likeness of eyes and lips. Therefore, one must assume the existence of several outer oceans separated by isthmuses and mainlands, which is absurd and false; or, if the ocean is single, it is not plausible that its reflected image be thus discontinuous.

     Tell me whether —for in your presence it is safer to put this as a question than as an assertion— whether it is possible, though the inhabited world has length and breadth, that every visual ray when reflected from the moon should in like manner reach the ocean, even the visual rays of those who are sailing in the great ocean itself, yes and who dwell in it as the Britons do, and that too even though the earth, as you say ¹⁷, does not have the relation of centre to the orbit of the moon. Well, this”, I said, “it is your business to consider; but the reflection of vision either in respect to the moon or in general is beyond your province and that of Hipparchus too ¹⁸. Although Hipparchus was industrious, still many find him unsatisfactory in his explanation of the nature of vision itself, which is more likely to involve a sympathetic compound and fusion ¹⁹ than any impacts and rebounds such as those of the atoms that Epicurus invented ²⁰. Moreover, Clearchus, I think, would refuse to assume with us that the moon is a body of weight and solidity instead of an ethereal and luminiferous star as you say ²¹; and such a moon ought to shatter and divert the visual ray so that reflection would be out of the question. But if anyone dismisses our objections, we shall ask how it is that the reflection of the ocean exists as a face only in the moon and is seen in none of all the many other stars, although reason requires that all or none of them should affect the visual ray in this fashion. But let us have done with this; and do you”, I said with a glance at Leucius, “recall to me what part of our position was stated first”.

     5. Καὶ ὁ Λεύκιος “ἀλλὰ μὴ δόξωμεν” ἔφη “κομιδῇ προπηλακίζειν τὸν Φαρνάκην, οὕτω τὴν Στωικὴν δόξαν ἀπροσαύδητον ὑπερβαίνοντες, εἰπὲ δή τι πρὸς τὸν ἄνδρα, παγέντος ἀέρος μῖγμα καὶ μαλακοῦ πυρὸς ὑποτιθέμενον τὴν σελήνην, εἶθ’ οἷον ἐν γαλήνῃ φρίκης ὑποτρεχούσης φάσκοντα τοῦ ἀέρος διαμελαίνοντος ἔμφασιν γίνεσθαι μορφοειδῆ … ”. “Xρηστῶς γ’” εἶπον “ὦ Λεύκιε, τὴν ἀτοπίαν εὐφήμοις περιαμπέχεις ὀνόμασιν· οὐχ οὕτω δ’ ὁ ἑταῖρος ἡμῶν, ἀλλ’, ὅπερ ἀληθὲς ἦν, ἔλεγεν ὑπωπιάζειν αὐτοὺς τὴν σελήνην, σπίλων καὶ μελασμῶν ἀναπιμπλάντας, ὁμοῦ μὲν Ἄρτεμιν καὶ Ἀθηνᾶν ἀνακαλοῦντας ὁμοῦ δὲ σύμμιγμα καὶ φύραμα ποιοῦντας ἀέρος ζοφεροῦ καὶ πυρὸς ἀνθρακώδους, οὐκ ἔχουσαν ἔξαψιν οὐδ’ αὐγὴν οἰκείαν, ἀλλὰ δυσκρινές τι σῶμα τυφόμενον ἀεὶ καὶ πυρίκαυστον, ὥσπερ τῶν κεραυνῶν τοὺς ἀλαμπεῖς καὶ ψολόεντας ὑπὸ τῶν ποιητῶν προσαγορευομένους. Ὅτι μέντοι πῦρ ἀνθρακῶδες, οἷον οὗτοι τὸ τῆς σελήνης ποιοῦσιν, οὐκ ἔχει διαμονὴν οὐδὲ σύστασιν ὅλως, ἐὰν μὴ στερεᾶς ὕλης καὶ στεγούσης ἅμα καὶ τρεφούσης ἐπιλάβηται, βέλτιον οἶμαι συνορᾶν ἐνίων φιλοσόφων τοὺς ἐν παιδιᾷ λέγοντας τὸν Ἥφαιστον εἰρῆσθαι χωλόν, ὅτι τὸ πῦρ ξύλου χωρὶς ὥσπερ οἱ χωλοὶ βακτηρίας οὐ πρόεισιν.

     Εἰ οὖν ἡ σελήνη πῦρ ἐστι, πόθεν αὐτῇ τοσοῦτος ἐγγέγονεν ἀήρ; ὁ γὰρ ἄνω καὶ κύκλῳ φερόμενος οὑτοσὶ τόπος οὐκ ἀέρος, ἀλλὰ κρείττονος οὐσίας καὶ πάντα λεπτύνειν καὶ συνεξάπτειν φύσιν ἐχούσης ἐστίν· εἰ δ’ ἐγγέγονε, πῶς οὐκ οἴχεται μεταβάλλων εἰς ἕτερον εἶδος ὑπὸ τοῦ πυρὸς ἐξαιθερωθείς, ἀλλὰ σῴζεται καὶ συνοικεῖ πυρὶ τοσοῦτον χρόνον, ὥσπερ ἥλοις ἀραρὼς ἀεὶ τοῖς αὐτοῖς μέρεσι καὶ συγγεγομφωμένος; Ἀραιῷ μὲν γὰρ ὄντι καὶ συγκεχυμένῳ μὴ μένειν ἀλλὰ σφάλλεσθαι προσήκει, συμπεπηγέναι δ’ οὐ δυνατὸν ἀναμεμιγμένον πυρὶ καὶ μήθ’ ὑγροῦ μετέχοντα μήτε γῆς, οἷς μόνοις ἀὴρ συμπήγνυσθαι πέφυκεν. Ἡ δὲ ῥύμη καὶ τὸν ἐν λίθοις ἀέρα καὶ τὸν ἐν ψυχρῷ μολίβδῳ συνεκκάει, μήτι γε δὴ τὸν ἐν πυρὶ δινούμενον μετὰ τάχους τοσούτου.

     Καὶ γὰρ Ἐμπεδοκλεῖ δυσκολαίνουσι πάγον ἀέρος χαλαζώδη ποιοῦντι τὴν σελήνην ὑπὸ τῆς τοῦ πυρὸς σφαίρας περιεχόμενον, αὐτοὶ δὲ τὴν σελήνην σφαῖραν οὖσαν πυρὸς ἀέρα φασὶν ἄλλον ἄλλῃ διεσπασμένον περιέχειν, καὶ ταῦτα μήτε ῥήξεις ἔχουσαν ἐν ἑαυτῇ μήτε βάθη καὶ κοιλότητας, ἅπερ οἱ γεώδη ποιοῦντες ἀπολείπουσιν, ἀλλ’ ἐπιπολῆς δηλονότι τῇ κυρτότητι ἐπικείμενον. Τοῦτο δ’ ἐστὶ καὶ πρὸς διαμονὴν ἄλογον καὶ πρὸς θέαν ἀδύνατον ἐν ταῖς πανσελήνοις· διορίσασθαι γὰρ οὐκ ἔδει μέλανα μένοντα καὶ σκιερόν, ἀλλ’ ἀμαυροῦσθαι κρυπτόμενον ἢ συνεκλάμπειν ὑπὸ τοῦ ἡλίου καταλαμβανομένης τῆς σελήνης. Καὶ γὰρ παρ’ ἡμῖν ὁ μὲν ἐν βάθεσι καὶ κοιλώμασι τῆς γῆς, οὗ μὴ δίεισιν αὐγή, διαμένει σκιώδης καὶ ἀφώτιστος, ὁ δ’ ἔξωθεν τῇ γῇ περικεχυμένος φέγγος ἴσχει καὶ χρόαν αὐγοειδῆ. Πρὸς πᾶσαν μὲν γάρ ἐστι ποιότητα καὶ δύναμιν εὐκέραστος ὑπὸ μανότητος, μάλιστα δὲ φωτὸς ἂν ἐπιψαύσῃ μόνον, ὥς φατε, καὶ θίγῃ, δι’ ὅλου τρεπόμενος ἐκφωτίζεται. Ταὐτὸν οὖν τοῦτο καὶ τοῖς εἰς βάθη τινὰ καὶ φάραγγας συνωθοῦσιν ἐν τῇ σελήνῃ τὸν ἀέρα κἂν καλῶς ἔοικε βοηθεῖν, ὑμᾶς τε διεξελέγχει τοὺς ἐξ ἀέρος καὶ πυρὸς οὐκ οἶδ’ ὅπως μιγνύντας αὐτῆς καὶ συναρμόζοντας τὴν σφαῖραν. Οὐ γὰρ οἷόν τε λείπεσθαι σκιὰν ἐπὶ τῆς ἐπιφανείας, ὅταν ὁ ἥλιος ἐπιλάμπῃ τῷ φωτὶ πᾶν ὁπόσον καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀποτεμνόμεθα τῇ ὄψει τῆς σελήνης”.

     5. Whereat Leucius said: “Nay, lest we give the impression of flatly insulting Pharnaces by thus passing over the Stoic opinion unnoticed, do now by all means address some remark to the gentleman who, supposing the moon to be a mixture of air and gentle fire, then says that what appears to be a figure is the result of the blackening of the air as when in a calm water there runs a ripple under the surface” ²². “You are very nice, Leucius”, I said, “to dress up the absurdity in respectable language. Not so our comrade ²³; but he said what is true, that they blacken the Moon’s eye defiling her with blemishes and bruises, at one and the same time addressing her as Artemis ²⁴ and Athena ²⁵ and making her a mass compounded of murky air and smouldering fire neither kindling nor shining of herself, an indiscriminate kind of body, forever charred and smoking like the thunderbolts that are darkling and by the poets called lurid ²⁶. Yet a smouldering fire, such as they suppose that of the moon to be, cannot persist or subsist at all unless it get solid fuel that shelters and at the same time nourishes it ²⁷; this some philosophers, I believe, see less clearly than do those who say in jest that Hephaestus is said to be lame because fire without wood, like the lame without a stick, makes no progress ²⁸.

     If the moon really is fire, whence came so much air in it? For the region that we see revolving above us is the place not of air but of a superior substance, the nature of which is to rarefy all things and set them afire; and, if air did come to be there, why has it not been etherealized by the fire ²⁹ and in this transformation disappeared but instead has been preserved as a housemate of fire this long time, as if nails had fixed it forever to the same spots and riveted it together? Air is tenuous and without configuration, and so it naturally slips and does not stay in place; and it cannot have become solidified if it is commingled with fire and partakes neither of moisture nor of earth by which all air can be solidified ³⁰. Moreover, velocity ignites the air in stones and in cold lead, not to speak of the air enclosed in fire that is whirling about with such great speed ³¹.

     Why, they are vexed by Empedocles because he represents the moon to be a hail-like congelation of air encompassed by the sphere of fire ³²; but they themselves say that the moon is a sphere of fire containing air dispersed about it here and there, and a sphere moreover that has neither clefts nor depths and hollows, such as are allowed by those who make it an earthy body, but has the air evidently resting upon its convex surface. That it should so remain is both contrary to reason and impossible to square with what is observed when the moon is full. On that assumption there should have been no distinction of dark and shadowy air; but all the air should become dark when occulted, or when the moon is caught by the sun it should all shine out with an even light. For with us too, while the air in the depths and hollows of the earth, wherever the sun's rays do not penetrate, remains shadowy and unlit, that which suffuses the earth outside takes on brilliance and a luminous colour. The reason is that air, because of its subtility, is delicately attuned to every quality and influence; and, especially if it touches light or, to use your phrase, merely is tangent to it, it is altered through and through and entirely illuminated ³³. So this same point seems right handsomely to re-enforce those who pack the air on the moon into depths of some kind and chasms, even as it utterly refutes you who make her globe an unintelligible mixture or compound of air and fire, —for it is not possible ³⁴ that a shadow remain upon the surface when the sun casts his light upon all of the moon that is within the compass of our vision”.

     6. Καὶ ὁ Φαρνάκης ἔτι μου λέγοντος “τοῦτ’ ἐκεῖνο πάλιν” εἶπεν “ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς ἀφῖκται τὸ περίακτον ἐκ τῆς Ἀκαδημείας, ἐν τῷ πρὸς ἑτέρους λέγειν διατρίβοντας ἑκάστοτε μὴ παρέχειν ἔλεγχον ὧν αὐτοὶ λέγουσιν, ἀλλ’ ἀπολογουμένοις ἀεὶ χρῆσθαι, μὴ κατηγοροῦσιν, ἂν ἐντυγχάνωσιν. ἐμὲ δ’ οὖν οὐκ ἐξάξεσθε τήμερον εἰς τὸ διδόναι λόγον ὧν ἐπικαλεῖτε τοῖς Στωικοῖς, πρὶν εὐθύνας λαβεῖν παρ’ ὑμῶν ἄνω τὰ κάτω τοῦ κόσμου ποιούντων”. Kαὶ ὁ Λεύκιος γελάσας “μόνον” εἶπεν “ὦ τάν, μὴ κρίσιν ἡμῖν ἀσεβείας ἐπαγγείλῃς, ὥσπερ Ἀρίσταρχον ᾤετο δεῖν Κλεάνθης τὸν Σάμιον ἀσεβείας προσκαλεῖσθαι τοὺς Ἕλληνας ὡς κινοῦντα τοῦ κόσμου τὴν ἑστίαν, ὅτι τὰ φαινόμενα σῴζειν ἁνὴρ ἐπειρᾶτο μένειν τὸν οὐρανὸν ὑποτιθέμενος, ἐξελίττεσθαι δὲ κατὰ λοξοῦ κύκλου τὴν γῆν, ἅμα καὶ περὶ τὸν αὑτῆς ἄξονα δινουμένην.

     Ἡμεῖς μὲν οὖν οὐδὲν αὐτοὶ παρ’ αὑτῶν λέγομεν· οἱ δὲ γῆν ὑποτιθέμενοι τὴν σελήνην, ὦ βέλτιστε, τί μᾶλλον ὑμῶν ἄνω τὰ κάτω ποιοῦσι τὴν γῆν ἱδρυόντων ἐνταῦθα μετέωρον ἐν τῷ ἀέρι, πολλῷ τινι μείζονα τῆς σελήνης οὖσαν, ὡς ἐν τοῖς ἐκλειπτικοῖς πάθεσιν οἱ μαθηματικοὶ καὶ ταῖς διὰ τοῦ σκιάσματος παρόδοις τῆς ἐποχῆς τὸ μέγεθος ἀναμετροῦσιν; ἥ τε γὰρ σκιὰ τῆς γῆς ἐλάττων ὑπὸ μείζονος τοῦ φωτίζοντος ἀνατείνει καὶ τῆς σκιᾶς αὐτῆς λεπτὸν ὂν τὸ ἄνω καὶ στενὸν οὐδ’ Ὅμηρον, ὥς φασιν, ἔλαθεν, ἀλλὰ τὴν νύκτα ‘θοήν’ ὀξύτητι τῆς σκιᾶς προσηγόρευσεν· ὑπὸ τούτου δ’ ὅμως ἁλισκομένη ταῖς ἐκλείψεσιν ἡ σελήνη τρισὶ μόλις τοῖς αὑτῆς μεγέθεσιν ἀπαλλάττεται. Σκόπει δὴ πόσων ἡ γῆ σεληνῶν ἐστιν, εἰ σκιὰν ἀφίησιν, ᾗ βραχυτάτη, πλάτος τρισέληνον. Ἀλλ’ ὅμως ὑπὲρ τῆς σελήνης μὴ πέσῃ δεδοίκατε, περὶ δὲ τῆς γῆς ἴσως Αἰσχύλος ὑμᾶς πέπεικεν ὡς ὁ Ἄτλας

ἕστηκε κίον’ οὐρανοῦ τε καὶ χθονὸς
ὤμοις ἐρείδων, ἄχθος οὐκ εὐάγκαλον.

     Ἢ τῇ μὲν σελήνῃ κοῦφος ἀὴρ ὑποτρέχει καὶ στερεὸν ὄγκον οὐκ ἐχέγγυος ἐνεγκεῖν, τὴν δὲ γῆν κατὰ Πίνδαρον ‘ἀδαμαντοπέδιλοι κίονες’ περιέχουσι, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο Φαρνάκης αὐτὸς μὲν ἐν ἀδείᾳ τοῦ πεσεῖν τὴν γῆν ἐστιν, οἰκτίρει δὲ τοὺς ὑποκειμένους τῇ μεταφορᾷ τῆς σελήνης Αἰθίοπας ἢ Ταπροβηνούς, μὴ βάρος αὐτοῖς ἐμπέσῃ τοσοῦτον; καίτοι τῇ μὲν σελήνῃ βοήθεια πρὸς τὸ μὴ πεσεῖν ἡ κίνησις αὐτὴ καὶ τὸ ῥοιζῶδες τῆς περιαγωγῆς, ὥσπερ ὅσα ταῖς σφενδόναις ἐντεθέντα τῆς καταφορᾶς κώλυσιν ἴσχει τὴν κύκλῳ περιδίνησιν· ἄγει γὰρ ἕκαστον ἡ κατὰ φύσιν κίνησις, ἂν ὑπ’ ἄλλου μηδενὸς ἀποστρέφηται. Διὸ τὴν σελήνην οὐκ ἄγει τὸ βάρος, ὑπὸ τῆς περιφορᾶς τὴν ῥοπὴν ἐκκρουόμενον· ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον ἴσως λόγον εἶχε θαυμάζειν μένουσαν αὐτὴν παντάπασιν ὥσπερ ἡ γῆ καὶ ἀτρεμοῦσαν. Νῦν δὲ σελήνη μὲν ἔχει μεγάλην αἰτίαν τοῦ δεῦρο μὴ φέρεσθαι, τὴν δὲ γῆν ἑτέρας κινήσεως ἄμοιρον οὖσαν εἰκὸς ἦν μόνῳ τῷ βαρύνοντι κινεῖν. Βαρυτέρα δ’ ἐστὶ τῆς σελήνης οὐχ ὅσῳ μείζων, ἀλλ’ ἔτι μᾶλλον, ἅτε δὴ διὰ θερμότητα καὶ πύρωσιν ἐλαφρᾶς γεγενημένης. Ὅλως δ’ ἔοικεν ἐξ ὧν λέγεις ἡ σελήνη μᾶλλον, εἰ πῦρ ἐστι, γῆς δεῖσθαι καὶ ὕλης, ἐν ᾗ βέβηκε καὶ προσπέφυκε καὶ συνέχει καὶ ζωπυρεῖ τὴν δύναμιν ‘οὐ γὰρ ἔστι πῦρ χωρὶς ὕλης διανοηθῆναι σῳζόμενον’· γῆν δέ φατε ὑμεῖς ἄνευ βάσεως καὶ ῥίζης διαμένειν”.

     “Πάνυ μὲν οὖν” εἶπεν ὁ Φαρνάκης, “τὸν οἰκεῖον καὶ κατὰ φύσιν τόπον ἔχουσαν, ὥσπερ αὕτη, τὸν μέσον. οὗτος γάρ ἐστι, περὶ ὃν ἀντερείδει πάντα τὰ βάρη ῥέποντα καὶ φέρεται καὶ συννεύει πανταχόθεν· ἡ δ’ ἄνω χώρα πᾶσα, κἄν τι δέξηται γεῶδες ὑπὸ βίας ἀναρριφέν, εὐθὺς ἐκθλίβει δεῦρο, μᾶλλον δ’ ἀφίησιν, ᾗ πέφυκεν οἰκείᾳ ῥοπῇ καταφερόμενον”.

     6. Even while I was still speaking Pharnaces spoke: “Here we are faced again with that stock manoeuvre of the Academy ³⁵: on each occasion that they engage in discourse with others they will not offer any accounting of their own assertions but must keep their interlocutors on the defensive lest they become the prosecutors. Well, me you will not to‑day entice into defending the Stoics against your charges until I have called you people to account for turning the universe upside down”. Thereupon Leucius laughed and said: “Oh sir, just don’t bring suit against us for impiety as Cleanthes thought that the Greeks ought to lay an action for impiety against Aristarchus the Samian on the ground that he was disturbing the hearth of the universe because he sought to save the phenomena by assuming that the heaven is at rest while the earth is revolving along the ecliptic and at the same time is rotating about its own axis ³⁶.

     We ³⁷ express no opinion of our own now; but those who suppose that the moon is earth, why do they, my dear sir, turn things upside down any more than you ³⁸ do who station the earth here suspended in the air? Yet the earth is a great deal larger than the moon ³⁹ according to the mathematicians who during the occurrence of eclipses and the transits of the moon through the shadow calculate her magnitude by the length of time that she is obscured ⁴⁰. For the shadow of the earth grows smaller the further it extends, because the body that cast the light is larger than the earth ⁴¹; and that the upper part of the shadow itself is taper and narrow was recognized, as they say, even by Homer, who called night ‘nimble’ because of the sharpness of the shadow ⁴². Yet captured by this part in eclipses ⁴³ the moon barely escapes from it in a space thrice her own magnitude. Consider then how many times as large as the moon the earth is, if the earth casts a shadow which at its narrowest is thrice as broad as the moon ⁴⁴. All the same, you fear for the moon lest it fall; whereas concerning the earth perhaps Aeschylus has persuaded you that Atlas

Stands, staying on his back the prop of earth
And sky no tender burden to embrace ⁴⁵.

     Or, while under the moon there stretches air unsubstantial and incapable of supporting a solid mass, the earth, as Pindar says, is encompassed by ‘steel-shod pillars’ ⁴⁶; and therefore Pharnaces is himself without any fear that the earth may fall but is sorry for the Ethiopians or Taprobanians ⁴⁷, who are situated under the circuit of the moon, lest such a great weight fall upon them. Yet the moon is saved from falling by its very motion and the rapidity of its revolution, just as missiles placed in slings are kept from falling by being whirled around in a circle ⁴⁸. For each thing is governed by its natural motion unless it be diverted by something else. That is why the moon is not governed by its weight: the weight has its influence frustrated by the rotatory motion. Nay, there would be more reason perhaps to wonder if she were absolutely unmoved and stationary like the earth. As it is, while the moon has good cause for not moving in this direction, the influence of weight alone might reasonably move the earth, since it has no part in any other motion; and the earth is heavier than the moon not merely in proportion to its greater size but still more, inasmuch as the moon has, of course, become light through the action of heat and fire ⁴⁹. In short, your own statements seem to make the moon, if it is fire, stand in greater need of earth, that is of matter to serve it as a foundation, as something to which to adhere, as something to lend it coherence, and as something that can be ignited by it, for it is impossible to imagine fire being maintained without fuel ⁵⁰, but you people say that earth does abide without root or foundation” ⁵¹.

     “Certainly it does”, said Pharnaces, “in occupying the proper and natural place that belongs to it, the middle, for this is the place about which all weights in their natural inclination press against one another and towards which they move and converge from every direction, whereas all the upper space, even if it receive something earthy which has been forcibly hurled up into it, straightway extrudes it into our region or rather lets it go where its proper inclination causes it naturally to descend” ⁵².

     7. Πρὸς τοῦτ’ ἐγὼ τῷ Λευκίῳ χρόνον ἐγγενέσθαι βουλόμενος ἀναμιμνησκομένῳ, τὸν Θέωνα καλέσας “τίς” ἔφην “ὦ Θέων, εἴρηκε τῶν τραγικῶν ὡς ἰατροί

πικρὰν πικροῖς κλύζουσι φαρμάκοις χολήν”;

     Ἀποκριναμένου δὲ τοῦ Θέωνος ὅτι Σοφοκλῆς, “καὶ δοτέον” εἶπον “ὑπ’ ἀνάγκης ἐκείνοις· φιλοσόφων δ’ οὐκ ἀκουστέον, ἂν τὰ παράδοξα παραδόξοις ἀμύνεσθαι βούλωνται καὶ μαχόμενοι πρὸς τὰ θαυμάσια τῶν δογμάτων ἀτοπώτερα καὶ θαυμασιώτερα πλάττωσιν, ὥσπερ οὗτοι τὴν ἐπὶ τὸ μέσον φορὰν εἰσάγουσιν. ᾞ τί παράδοξον οὐκ ἔνεστιν; Οὐχὶ τὴν γῆν σφαῖραν εἶναι, τηλικαῦτα βάθη καὶ ὕψη καὶ ἀνωμαλίας ἔχουσαν; Οὐκ ἀντίποδας οἰκεῖν ὥσπερ θρῖπας ἢ γαλεώτας τραπέντα ἄνω τὰ κάτω τῇ γῇ προσισχομένους; Ἡμᾶς δ’ αὐτοὺς μὴ πρὸς ὀρθὰς βεβηκότας ἀλλὰ πλαγίους ἐπιμένειν ἀπονεύοντας, ὥσπερ οἱ μεθύοντες; οὐ μύδρους χιλιοταλάντους διὰ βάθους τῆς γῆς φερομένους, ὅταν ἐξίκωνται πρὸς τὸ μέσον, ἵστασθαι μηδενὸς ἀπαντῶντος μηδ’ ὑπερείδοντος, εἰ δὲ ῥύμῃ κάτω φερόμενοι τὸ μέσον ὑπερβάλλοιεν, αὖθις ὀπίσω στρέφεσθαι καὶ ἀνακάμπτειν ἀπ’ αὐτῶν; οὐ τμήματα δοκῶν ἀποπρισθέντα τῆς γῆς ἑκατέρωθεν μὴ φέρεσθαι κάτω διὰ παντός, ἀλλὰ προσπίπτοντα πρὸς τὴν γῆν ἔξωθεν εἴσω διωθεῖσθαι καὶ ἀποκρύπτεσθαι περὶ τὸ μέσον; Οὐ ῥεῦμα λάβρον ὕδατος κάτω φερόμενον εἰ πρὸς τὸ μέσον ἔλθοι σημεῖον, ὅπερ αὐτοὶ λέγουσιν ἀσώματον, ἵστασθαι περικορυσσόμενον ἢ κύκλῳ περιπολεῖν, ἄπαυστον αἰώραν καὶ ἀκατάπαυστον αἰωρούμενον;

     Οὐδὲ γὰρ ψευδῶς ἔνια τούτων βιάσαιτο ἄν τις αὑτὸν εἰς τὸ δυνατὸν τῇ ἐπινοίᾳ καταστῆσαι. Τοῦτο γάρ ἐστι τὰ ἄνω κάτω κἂν πάντα τραπέμπαλιν εἶναι, τῶν ἄχρι τοῦ μέσου κάτω τῶν δ’ ὑπὸ τὸ μέσον αὖ πάλιν ἄνω γινομένων· ὥστ’, εἴ τις συμπαθείᾳ τῆς γῆς τὸ μέσον αὐτῆς ἔχων σταίη περὶ τὸν ὀμφαλόν, ἅμα καὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν ἄνω καὶ τοὺς πόδας ἄνω ἔχειν τὸν αὐτόν· κἂν μὲν διασκάπτῃ τις τὸν ἐπέκεινα τόπον, ἀνακύπτον αὐτοῦ τὸ … εἶναι καὶ κάτω ἄνωθεν ἕλκεσθαι τὸν ἀνασκαπτόμενον, εἰ δὲ δὴ τούτῳ τις ἀντιβεβηκὼς νοοῖτο, τοὺς ἀμφοτέρων ἅμα πόδας ἄνω γίνεσθαι καὶ λέγεσθαι.

     7. At this —for I wished Leucius to have time to collect his thoughts— I called to Theon. "Which of the tragic poets was it, Theon", I asked, "who said that physicians

With bitter drugs the bitter bile purge?"

     Theon replied that it was Sophocles ⁵³. "Yes", I said, "and we have of necessity to allow them this procedure; but to philosophers one should not listen if they desire to repulse paradoxes with paradoxes and in struggling against opinions that are amazing fabricate others that are more amazing and outlandish ⁵⁴, as these people do in introducing their ‘motion to the centre’. What paradox is not involved in this doctrine? Not the one that the earth is a sphere although it contains such great depths and heights and irregularities ⁵⁵? Not that people live on the opposite hemisphere clinging to the earth like wood-worms or geckos turned bottomside up ⁵⁶? — and that we ourselves in standing remain not at right angles to the earth but at an oblique angle, leaning from the perpendicular like drunken men ⁵⁷? Not that incandescent masses of forty tons ⁵⁸ falling through the depth of the earth stop when they arrive at the centre, though nothing encounter or support them; and, if in their downward motion the impetus should carry them past the centre, they swing back again and return of themselves? Not that pieces of meteors burnt out on either side of the earth do not move downwards continually but falling upon the surface of the earth force their way into it from the outside and conceal themselves about the centre ⁵⁹? Not that a turbulent stream of water, if in flowing downwards should reach the middle point, which they themselves call incorporeal ⁶⁰, stops suspended or moves round about it, oscillating in an incessant and perpetual see-saw ⁶¹?

     Some of these a man could not even mistakenly force himself to conceive as possible. For this amounts to ‘upside down’ and ‘all things topsy-turvy’, everything as far as the centre being ‘down’ and everything under the centre in turn being ‘up’ ⁶². The result is that, if a man should so coalesce with the earth ⁶³ that its centre is at his navel, the same person at the same time has his head up and his feet up too. Moreover, if he dig through the further side, his bottom in emerging is up, and the man digging himself ‘up’ is pulling himself ‘down’ from ‘above’ ⁶⁴; and, if someone should then be imagined to have gone in the opposite direction to this man, the feet of both of them at the same time turn out to be ‘up’ and are so called.

     8. Τοιούτων μέντοι καὶ τοσούτων παραδοξολογιῶν οὐ μὰ Δία πήραν, ἀλλὰ θαυματοποιοῦ τινος ἀποσκευὴν καὶ πυλαίαν κατανωτισάμενοι καὶ παρέλκοντες ἑτέρους φασὶ γελοιάζειν, ἄνω τὴν σελήνην γῆν οὖσαν ἐνιδρύοντας, οὐχ ὅπου τὸ μέσον ἐστί. Καίτοι γ’ εἰ πᾶν σῶμα ἐμβριθὲς εἰς τὸ αὐτὸ συννεύει καὶ πρὸς τὸ αὑτοῦ μέσον ἀντερείδει πᾶσι τοῖς μορίοις, οὐχ ὡς μέσον οὖσα τοῦ παντὸς ἡ γῆ μᾶλλον ἢ ὡς ὅλον οἰκειώσεται μέρη αὐτῆς ὄντα τὰ βάρη· καὶ τεκμήριον … ἔσται τῶν ῥεπόντων οὐ τῇ γῇ τῆς μεσότητος πρὸς τὸν κόσμον, ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὴν γῆν κοινωνίας τινὸς καὶ συμφυΐας τοῖς ἀπωσμένοις αὐτῆς εἶτα πάλιν καταφερομένοις. Ὡς γὰρ ὁ ἥλιος εἰς ἑαυτὸν ἐπιστρέφει τὰ μέρη ἐξ ὧν συνέστηκε, καὶ ἡ γῆ τὸν λίθον ὥσπερ … προσήκοντα δέχεται καὶ φέρει προσκείμενον· ὅθεν ἑνοῦται τῷ χρόνῳ καὶ συμφύεται πρὸς αὐτὴν τῶν τοιούτων ἕκαστον.

     Εἰ δέ τι τυγχάνει σῶμα τῇ γῇ μὴ προσνενεμημένον ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς μηδ’ ἀπεσπασμένον, ἀλλά που καθ’ αὑτὸ σύστασιν ἔσχεν ἰδίαν καὶ φύσιν, ὡς φαῖεν ἂν ἐκεῖνοι τὴν σελήνην, τί κωλύει χωρὶς εἶναι καὶ μένειν περὶ αὑτό, τοῖς αὑτοῦ πεπιεσμένον μέρεσι καὶ συμπεπεδημένον; Οὔτε γὰρ ἡ γῆ μέσον οὖσα δείκνυται τοῦ παντὸς ἥ τε πρὸς τὴν γῆν τῶν ἐνταῦθα συνέρεισις καὶ σύστασις ὑφηγεῖται τὸν τρόπον, ᾧ μένειν τὰ ἐκεῖ συμπεσόντα πρὸς τὴν σελήνην εἰκός ἐστιν. Ὁ δὲ πάντα τὰ γεώδη καὶ βαρέα συνελαύνων εἰς μίαν χώραν καὶ μέρη ποιῶν ἑνὸς σώματος οὐχ ὁρῶ διὰ τί τοῖς κούφοις τὴν αὐτὴν ἀνάγκην οὐκ ἀνταποδίδωσιν, ἀλλ’ ἐᾷ χωρὶς εἶναι συστάσεις πυρὸς τοσαύτας καὶ οὐ πάντας εἰς ταὐτὸ συνάγων τοὺς ἀστέρας ἓν φῶς οἴεται δεῖν καὶ σῶμα κοινὸν εἶναι τῶν ἀνωφερῶν καὶ φλογοειδῶν ἁπάντων.

     8. Nevertheless, though of tall tales of such a kind and number they have shouldered and lugged in — not a wallet-full, by heaven, but some juggler's pack and hotchpotch, still they say ⁶⁵ that others are playing the buffoon by placing the moon, though it is earth, on high and not where the centre is. Yet if all heavy body converges to the same point and is compressed in all its parts upon its own centre ⁶⁶, it is no more as centre of the sum of things than as a whole that the earth would appropriate to herself the heavy bodies that are parts of herself; and the downward tendency of falling bodies ⁶⁷ proves not that the earth is in the centre of the cosmos but that those bodies which when thrust away from the earth fall back to her again have some affinity and cohesion with her ⁶⁸. For as the sun attracts to itself the parts of which it consists ⁶⁹ so the earth too accepts as her own the stone ⁷⁰ that has properly a downward tendency, and consequently every such thing ultimately unites and coheres with her.

     If there is a body, however, that was not originally allotted to the earth or detached from it but has somewhat independently a constitution and nature of its own, as those men ⁷¹ would say of the moon, what is to hinder it from being permanently separate in its own place, compressed and bound together by its own parts? For it has not been proved that the earth is the centre of the sum of things ⁷², and the way in which things in our region press together and concentrate upon the earth suggests how in all probability things in that region converge upon the moon and remain there. The man who drives together into a single region all earthy and heavy things and makes them part of a single body — I do not see for what reason he does not apply the same compulsion to light objects in their turn but allows so many separate concentrations of fire and, since he does not collect all the stars together, clearly does not think that there must also be a body common to all things that are fiery and have an upward tendency.

     9. Ἀλλ’ ἥλιον μὲν ἀπλέτους μυριάδας ἀπέχειν τῆς ἄνω περιφορᾶς φατε” εἶπον, “ὦ φίλε Ἀπολλωνίδη, καὶ φωσφόρον ἐπ’ αὐτῷ καὶ στίλβοντα καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους πλάνητας ὑφιεμένους τε τῶν ἀπλανῶν καὶ πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἐν διαστάσεσι μεγάλαις φέρεσθαι, τοῖς δὲ βαρέσι καὶ γεώδεσιν οὐδεμίαν οἴεσθε τὸν κόσμον εὐρυχωρίαν παρέχειν ἐν ἑαυτῷ καὶ διάστασιν; Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι γελοῖόν ἐστιν, εἰ γῆν οὐ φήσομεν εἶναι τὴν σελήνην, ὅτι τῆς κάτω χώρας ἀφέστηκεν, ἄστρον δὲ φήσομεν, ὁρῶντες ἀπωσμένην τῆς ἄνω περιφορᾶς μυριάσι σταδίων τοσαύταις ὥσπερ εἰς βυθόν τινα καταδεδυκυῖαν. Τῶν μέν γ’ ἄστρων κατωτέρω τοσοῦτόν ἐστιν, ὅσον οὐκ ἄν τις εἴποι μέτρον, ἀλλ’ ἐπιλείπουσιν ὑμᾶς τοὺς μαθηματικοὺς ἐκλογιζομένους οἱ ἀριθμοί, τῆς δὲ γῆς τρόπον τινὰ ψαύει καὶ περιφερομένη πλησίον,

ἅρματος ὡς πέρι χνοίη ἑλίσσεται

φησὶν Ἐμπεδοκλῆς,

ἥ τε περὶ ἄκραν … .

     Οὐδὲ γὰρ τὴν σκιὰν αὐτῆς ὑπερβάλλει πολλάκις ἐπὶ μικρὸν αἰρομένην τῷ παμμέγεθες εἶναι τὸ φωτίζον, ἀλλ’ οὕτως ἔοικεν ἐν χρῷ καὶ σχεδὸν ἐν ἀγκάλαις τῆς γῆς περιπολεῖν, ὥστ’ ἀντιφράττεσθαι πρὸς τὸν ἥλιον ὑπ’ αὐτῆς, μὴ ὑπεραίρουσα τὸν σκιερὸν καὶ χθόνιον καὶ νυκτέριον τοῦτον τόπον, ὃς γῆς κλῆρός ἐστι. Διὸ λεκτέον οἶμαι θαρροῦντας ἐν τοῖς γῆς ὅροις εἶναι τὴν σελήνην ὑπὸ τῶν ἄκρων αὐτῆς ἐπιπροθουμένην.

     9. Now”, said I, “my dear Apollonides, you mathematicians ⁷³ say that the sun is an immense distance from the upper circumference and that above the sun Venus and Mercury and the other planets ⁷⁴ revolved lower than the fixed stars and at great intervals from one another; but you think that in the cosmos there is provided no scope and extension for heavy and earthy objects. You see that it is ridiculous for us to deny that the moon is earth because she stands apart from the nether region and yet to call her a star although we see her removed so many thousands of miles from the upper circumference as if plunged into a pit. So far beneath the stars is she that the distance cannot be expressed, but you mathematicians in trying to calculate it run short of numbers; she practically grazes the earth and revolving close to it

Whirls like a chariot’s axle-box about,

Empedocles says ⁷⁵,

that skims the post in passing.

     Frequently she does not even surmount the earth’s shadow, though it extends but a little way because the illuminating body is very large; but she seems to revolve so close, almost within arm’s reach of the earth, as to be screened by it from the sun unless she rises above this shadowy, terrestrial, and nocturnal place which is the earth’s estate. Therefore we must boldly declare, I think, that the moon is within the confines of the earth inasmuch as she is occulted by its extremities.

     10. Σκόπει δὲ τοὺς ἄλλους ἀφεὶς ἀπλανεῖς καὶ πλάνητας, ἃ δείκνυσιν Ἀρίσταρχος ἐν τῷ Περὶ μεγεθῶν καὶ ἀποστημάτων, ὅτι τὸ τοῦ ἡλίου ἀπόστημα τοῦ ἀποστήματος τῆς σελήνης ὃ ἀφέστηκεν ἡμῶν πλέον μὲν ἢ ὀκτωκαιδεκαπλάσιον ἔλαττον δ’ ἢ εἰκοσαπλάσιόν ἐστι. Καίτοι ὁ τὴν σελήνην ἐπὶ μήκιστον αἴρων ἀπέχειν φησὶν ἡμῶν ἓξ καὶ πεντηκονταπλάσιον τῆς ἐκ τοῦ κέντρου τῆς γῆς· αὕτη δ’ ἐστὶ τεσσάρων μυριάδων καὶ κατὰ τοὺς μέσως ἀναμετροῦντας· καὶ ἀπὸ ταύτης συλλογιζομένοις ἀπέχει ὁ ἥλιος τῆς σελήνης πλέον ἢ τετρακισχιλίας τριάκοντα μυριάδας· οὕτως ἀπῴκισται τοῦ ἡλίου διὰ βάρος καὶ τοσοῦτο τῇ γῇ προσκεχώρηκεν. Ὥστε, εἰ τοῖς τόποις τὰς οὐσίας διαιρετέον, ἡ γῆς μοῖρα καὶ χώρα προσκαλεῖται σελήνην, καὶ τοῖς περὶ γῆν πράγμασι καὶ σώμασιν ἐπίδικός ἐστι κατ’ ἀγχιστείαν καὶ γειτνίασιν.

     Καὶ οὐδὲν οἶμαι πλημμελοῦμεν, ὅτι τοῖς ἄνω προσαγορευομένοις βάθος τοσοῦτο καὶ διάστημα διδόντες ἀπολείπομέν τινα καὶ τῷ κάτω περιδρομὴν καὶ πλάτος, ὅσον ἐστὶν ἀπὸ γῆς ἐπὶ σελήνην. Οὔτε γὰρ ὁ τὴν ἄκραν ἐπιφάνειαν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ μόνην ἄνω τἄλλα δὲ κάτω προσαγορεύων ἅπαντα μέτριός ἐστιν, οὔθ’ ὁ τῇ γῇ μᾶλλον δ’ ὁ τῷ κέντρῳ τὸ κάτω περιγράφων ἀνεκτός· ἀλλὰ καὶ κινητικὸν ταύτῃ διάστημα δοτέον ἐπιχωροῦντος τοῦ κόσμου διὰ μέγεθος. Πρὸς δὲ τὸν ἀξιοῦντα πᾶν εὐθὺς ἄνω καὶ μετέωρον εἶναι τὸ ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς ἕτερος ἀντηχεῖ πάλιν εὐθὺς εἶναι κάτω τὸ ἀπὸ τῆς ἀπλανοῦς περιφορᾶς.

     10. Dismiss the fixed stars and the other planets and consider the demonstrations of Aristarchus in his treatise, On Sizes and Distances, that ‘the distance of the sun is more than 18 times and less than 20 times the distance of the moon’, that is its distance from us ⁷⁶. According to the highest estimate, however, the moon’s distance from us is said to be 56 times the radius of the earth ⁷⁷. Even according to the mean calculations this radius is 40,000 stades; and, if we reckon from this, the sun is more than 40,300,000 stades distant from the moon. She has migrated so far from the sun on account of her weight and has moved so close to the earth that, if properties ⁷⁸ are to be determined by locations, the lot, I mean the position, of earth lays an action against the moon and she is legally assignable by right of propinquity and kinship to the chattels real and personal of earth.

     And we do not go wrong, I think, when we assign to those bodies above denominated such immense depth and distance, and leave to that which is below a certain circular course and broadway as much as lies between earth and the moon: for neither the man who pretends the summit of heaven to be the sole ‘above’, and denominates all the rest as ‘below’, is reasonable in his definition; nor yet is he who circumscribes ‘below’ by the limits of Earth, or rather by the Centre, to be listened to: but even moveable … inasmuch as the universe allows of the interval required by reason of its own extensiveness. But in reply to such as demand that all which is separate from earth shall be consequently ‘above’ and ‘on high’, another directly responds with the contrary axiom, that all which is reckoned from the fixed circumference is to be considered as ‘below’.

     11. Ὅλως δὲ πῶς λέγεται καὶ τίνος ἡ γῆ μέση κεῖσθαι; τὸ γὰρ πᾶν ἄπειρόν ἐστι, τῷ δ’ ἀπείρῳ μήτ’ ἀρχὴν ἔχοντι μήτε πέρας οὐ προσήκει μέσον ἔχειν· πέρας γάρ τι καὶ τὸ μέσον, ἡ δ’ ἀπειρία περάτων στέρησις. Ὁ δὲ μὴ τοῦ παντὸς ἀλλὰ τοῦ κόσμου μέσην εἶναι τὴν γῆν ἀποφαινόμενος ἡδύς ἐστιν, εἰ μὴ καὶ τὸν κόσμον αὐτὸν ἐνέχεσθαι ταῖς αὐταῖς ἀπορίαις νομίζει. Τὸ γὰρ πᾶν οὐδὲ τούτῳ μέσον ἀπέλιπεν, ἀλλ’ ἀνέστιος καὶ ἀνίδρυτός ἐστιν ἐν ἀπείρῳ κενῷ φερόμενος πρὸς οὐδὲν οἰκεῖον· εἰ δ’ ἄλλην τινὰ τοῦ μένειν εὑράμενος αἰτίαν ἕστηκεν, οὐ κατὰ τὴν τοῦ τόπου φύσιν, ὅμοια καὶ περὶ γῆς καὶ περὶ σελήνης εἰκάζειν τινὶ πάρεστιν, ὡς ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τύχῃ καὶ φύσει μᾶλλον ἢ τόπου διαφορᾷ τῆς μὲν ἀτρεμούσης ἐνταῦθα τῆς δ’ ἐκεῖ φερομένης.

     Ἄνευ δὲ τούτων, ὅρα μὴ μέγα τι λέληθεν αὐτούς· εἰ γάρ, καὶ ὁπωσοῦν ὅ τι ἂν ἐκτὸς γένηται τοῦ κέντρου τῆς γῆς, ἄνω ἐστίν, οὐθέν ἐστι τοῦ κόσμου κάτω μέρος, ἀλλ’ ἄνω καὶ ἡ γῆ καὶ τὰ ἐπὶ γῆς, καὶ πᾶν ἁπλῶς σῶμα τὸ κέντρῳ περιεστηκὸς ἢ περικείμενον ἄνω γίνεται, κάτω δὲ μόνον ὂν ἕν, τὸ ἀσώματον σημεῖον ἐκεῖνο, ὃ πρὸς πᾶσαν ἀντικεῖσθαι τὴν τοῦ κόσμου φύσιν ἀναγκαῖον, εἴ γε δὴ τὸ κάτω πρὸς τὸ ἄνω κατὰ φύσιν ἀντίκειται. Καὶ οὐ τοῦτο μόνον τὸ ἄτοπον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν ἀπόλλυσι τὰ βάρη, δι’ ἣν δεῦρο καταρρέπει καὶ φέρεται· σῶμα μὲν γὰρ οὐθέν ἐστι κάτω πρὸς ὃ κινεῖται, τὸ δ’ ἀσώματον οὔτ’ εἰκὸς οὔτε βούλονται τοσαύτην ἔχειν δύναμιν, ὥστε πάντα κατατείνειν ἐφ’ ἑαυτὸ καὶ περὶ αὑτὸ συνέχειν. ἀλλ’ ὅλως ἄλογον εὑρίσκεται καὶ μαχόμενον τοῖς πράγμασι τὸ ἄνω τὸν κόσμον ὅλον εἶναι, τὸ δὲ κάτω μηθὲν ἀλλ’ ἢ πέρας ἀσώματον καὶ ἀδιάστατον· ἐκεῖνο δ’ εὔλογον, ὡς λέγομεν ἡμεῖς, τῷ τ’ ἄνω χώραν καὶ τῷ κάτω πολλὴν καὶ πλάτος ἔχουσαν διῃρῆσθαι.

     11. After all, in what sense is earth situated in the middle and in the middle of what? The sum of things is infinite; and the infinite, having neither beginning nor limit, cannot properly have a middle, for the middle is a kind of limit too but infinity is a negation of limits. He who asserts that the earth is in the middle not of the sum of things but of the cosmos is naïve if he supposes that the cosmos itself is not also involved in the same difficulties ⁷⁹. In fact, in the sum of things no middle has been left for the cosmos either, but it is without hearth and habitation ⁸⁰, moving in infinite void to nothing of its own; or, if it has come to rest because it has found some other reason for abiding, not because of the nature of its location ⁸¹, similar inferences are permissible in the cases of both earth and moon, that the former is stationary here and the latter is in motion there by reason of a different soul or nature rather than a difference of location.

     Besides this, consider whether they ⁸² have not overlooked an important point. If anything in any way at all off the centre of the earth is ‘up’, no part of the cosmos is ‘down’; but it turns out that the earth and the things on the earth and absolutely all body surrounding or enclosing the centre are ‘up’ and only one thing is ‘down’, that incorporeal point ⁸³ which must be in opposition to the entire nature of the cosmos, if in fact 'down' and 'up' are natural opposites ⁸⁴. This, moreover, does not exhaust the absurdity. The cause of the descent of heavy objects and of their motion to this region is also abolished, for there is no body that is 'down' towards which they are in motion and it is neither likely nor in accordance with the intention of these men that the incorporeal should have so much influence as to attract all these objects and keep them together around itself ⁸⁵. On the contrary, it proves to be entirely unreasonable and inconsistent with the facts for the whole cosmos to be ‘up’ and nothing but an incorporeal and unextended limit to be ‘down’; but that statement of ours is reasonable, that ample space and broad has been divided between ‘up’ and ‘down’.

     12. Οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ θέντες, εἰ βούλει, παρὰ φύσιν ἐν οὐρανῷ τοῖς γεώδεσι τὰς κινήσεις ὑπάρχειν, ἀτρέμα, μὴ τραγικῶς ἀλλὰ πράως σκοπῶμεν, ὅτι τοῦτο τὴν σελήνην οὐ δείκνυσι γῆν μὴ οὖσαν ἀλλὰ γῆν ὅπου μὴ πέφυκεν οὖσαν· ἐπεὶ καὶ τὸ πῦρ τὸ Αἰτναῖον ὑπὸ γῆν παρὰ φύσιν ἐστίν, ἀλλὰ πῦρ ἐστι, καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τοῖς ἀσκοῖς περιληφθὲν ἔστι μὲν ἀνωφερὲς φύσει καὶ κοῦφον, ἥκει δ’ ὅπου μὴ πέφυκεν ὑπ’ ἀνάγκης· αὐτὴ δ’ ἡ ψυχή, πρὸς Διός” εἶπον “οὐ παρὰ φύσιν τῷ σώματι συνεῖρκται βραδεῖ ταχεῖα καὶ ψυχρῷ πυρώδης, ὥσπερ ὑμεῖς φατε, καὶ ἀόρατος αἰσθητῷ; Διὰ τοῦτ’ οὖν σώματι ψυχὴν μὴ λέγωμεν ἐνεῖναι μηδὲ νοῦν, χρῆμα θεῖον, ἀήττητον ὑπὸ βρίθους καὶ πάχους οὐρανόν τε πάντα καὶ γῆν καὶ θάλασσαν ἐν ταὐτῷ περιπολοῦντα καὶ διιπτάμενον, εἰς σάρκας ἥκειν καὶ νεῦρα καὶ μυελοὺς καὶ παθέων μυρίων μεστὰς ὑγρότητας;

     Ὁ δὲ Ζεὺς ὑμῖν οὗτος οὐ τῇ μὲν αὑτοῦ φύσει χρώμενος ἕν ἐστι μέγα πῦρ καὶ συνεχές, νυνὶ δ’ ὑφεῖται καὶ κέκαμπται καὶ διεσχημάτισται, πᾶν χρῶμα γεγονὼς καὶ γινόμενος ἐν ταῖς μεταβολαῖς; ὥσθ’ ὅρα καὶ σκόπει, δαιμόνιε, μὴ μεθιστὰς καὶ ἀπάγων ἕκαστον, ὅπου πέφυκεν εἶναι, διάλυσίν τινα κόσμου φιλοσοφῇς καὶ τὸ νεῖκος ἐπάγῃς τὸ Ἐμπεδοκλέους τοῖς πράγμασι, μᾶλλον δὲ τοὺς παλαιοὺς κινῇς Τιτᾶνας ἐπὶ τὴν φύσιν καὶ Γίγαντας καὶ τὴν μυθικὴν ἐκείνην καὶ φοβερὰν ἀκοσμίαν καὶ πλημμέλειαν ἐπιδεῖν ποθῇς, χωρὶς τὸ βαρὺ πᾶν καὶ χωρὶς … τὸ κοῦφον

ἔνθ’ οὔτ’ ἠελίοιο δεδίσκεται ἀγλαὸν εἶδος,
οὐδὲ μὲν οὐδ’ αἴης λάσιον γένος, οὐδὲ θάλασσα,

ὥς φησιν Ἐμπεδοκλῆς, οὐ γῆ θερμότητος μετεῖχεν, οὐχ ὕδωρ πνεύματος, οὐκ ἄνω τι τῶν βαρέων, οὐ κάτω τι τῶν κούφων· ἀλλ’ ἄκρατοι καὶ ἄστοργοι καὶ μονάδες αἱ τῶν ὅλων ἀρχαί, μὴ προσιέμεναι σύγκρισιν ἑτέρου πρὸς ἕτερον μηδὲ κοινωνίαν, ἀλλὰ φεύγουσαι καὶ ἀποστρεφόμεναι καὶ φερόμεναι φορὰς ἰδίας καὶ αὐθάδεις οὕτως εἶχον ὡς ἔχει πᾶν οὗ θεὸς ἄπεστι κατὰ Πλάτωνα τουτέστιν, ὡς ἔχει τὰ σώματα νοῦ καὶ ψυχῆς ἀπολιπούσης, ἄχρις οὗ τὸ ἱμερτὸν ἧκεν ἐπὶ τὴν φύσιν ἐκ προνοίας, Φιλότητος ἐγγενομένης καὶ Ἀφροδίτης καὶ Ἔρωτος, ὡς Ἐμπεδοκλῆς λέγει καὶ Παρμενίδης καὶ Ἡσίδος, ἵνα καὶ τόπους ἀμείψαντα καὶ δυνάμεις ἀπ’ ἀλλήλων μεταλαβόντα καὶ τὰ μὲν κινήσεως τὰ δὲ μονῆς ἀνάγκαις ἐνδεθέντα καὶ καταβιασθέντα πρὸς τὸ βέλτιον, ἐξ οὗ πέφυκεν, ἐνδοῦναι καὶ μεταστῆναι … ἁρμονίαν καὶ κοινωνίαν ἀπεργάσηται τοῦ παντός.

     12. All the same, let us assume, if you please, that the motions of earthy objects in the heaven are contrary to nature; and then let us calmly observe without any histrionics and quite dispassionately that this indicates not that the moon is not earth but that she is earth in an ‘unnatural’ location. For the fire of Aetna too is below earth ‘unnaturally’, but it is fire; and the air confined in skins ⁸⁶, though by nature it is light and has an upward tendency, has been constrained to occupy an ‘unnatural’ location. As to the soul herself”, I said, “by Zeus, is her confinement in body not contrary to nature, swift as she is and fiery, as you say ⁸⁷, and invisible in a sluggish, cold, and sensible vehicle? Shall we then on this account deny that there is a soul in body or that mind, a divine thing, though it traverses instantaneously in its flight all heaven and earth and sea ⁸⁸, has passed into flesh and sinew and marrow under the influence of weight and density and countless qualities that attend liquefaction ⁸⁹?

     This Zeus of yours too, is it not true that, while in his own nature he is single, a great and continuous fire, at present he is slackened and subdued and transformed, having become and continuing to become everything in the course of his mutations ⁹⁰? So look out and reflect, good sir, lest in rearranging and removing each thing to its ‘natural’ location you contrive a dissolution of the cosmos and bring upon things the ‘Strife’ of Empedocles —or rather lest you arouse against nature the ancient Titans and Giants ⁹¹ and long to look upon that legendary and dreadful disorder and discord when you have separated all that is heavy and all that is light.

The sun’s bright aspect is not there descried,
No, nor the shaggy might of earth, nor sea

as Empedocles says ⁹². Earth had no part in heat, water no part in air; there was not anything heavy above or anything light below; but the principles of all things ⁹³ were untempered and unamiable ⁹⁴ and solitary, not accepting combination or association with one another, but avoiding and shunning one another and moving with their own peculiar and arbitrary motions ⁹⁵ they were in the state in which, according to Plato ⁹⁶, everything is from which God is absent, that is to say in which bodies are when mind or soul is wanting. So they were until desire came over nature providentially, for Affection arose or Aphrodite or Eros, as Empedocles says and Parmenides and Hesiod ⁹⁷, in order that by changing position and interchanging functions and by being constrained some to motion and some to rest and compelled to give way and shift from the ‘natural’ to the ‘better’ the bodies might produce a universal concord and community.

     13. Εἰ μὲν γὰρ οὐδ’ ἄλλο τι τῶν τοῦ κόσμου μερῶν παρὰ φύσιν ἔσχεν, ἀλλ’ ἕκαστον ᾗ πέφυκε κεῖται, μηδεμιᾶς μεθιδρύσεως μηδὲ μετακοσμήσεως δεόμενον μηδ’ ἐν ἀρχῇ δεηθέν, ἀπορῶ τί τῆς προνοίας ἔργον ἐστὶν ἢ τίνος γέγονε ποιητὴς καὶ πατὴρ δημιουργὸς ὁ Ζεὺς ‘ὁ ἀριστοτέχνας’. Οὐ γὰρ ἐν στρατοπέδῳ τακτικῶν ὄφελος, εἴπερ εἰδείη τῶν στρατιωτῶν ἕκαστος ἀφ’ ἑαυτοῦ τάξιν τε καὶ χώραν κατὰ καιρὸν οὗ δεῖ λαβεῖν καὶ διαφυλάσσειν, οὐδὲ κηπουρῶν οὐδ’ οἰκοδόμων, εἰ πῆ μὲν αὐτὸ τὸ ὕδωρ ἀφ’ αὑτοῦ πέφυκεν ἐπιέναι τοῖς δεομένοις καὶ κατάρδειν ἐπιρρέον, πῆ δὲ πλίνθοι καὶ ξύλα καὶ λίθοι ταῖς κατὰ φύσιν χρώμενα ῥοπαῖς καὶ νεύσεσιν ἐξ ἑαυτῶν καταλαμβάνειν τὴν προσήκουσαν ἁρμονίαν καὶ χώραν.

     Εἰ δ’ οὗτος μὲν ἄντικρυς ἀναιρεῖ τὴν πρόνοιαν ὁ λόγος, τῷ θεῷ δ’ ἡ τάξις τῶν ὄντων προσήκει καὶ τὸ διαιρεῖν, τί θαυμαστὸν οὕτως τετάχθαι καὶ διηρμόσθαι τὴν φύσιν, ὡς ἐνταῦθα μὲν πῦρ ἐκεῖ δ’ ἄστρα, καὶ πάλιν ἐνταῦθα μὲν γῆν ἄνω δὲ σελήνην ἱδρῦσθαι, βεβαιοτέρῳ τοῦ κατὰ φύσιν τῷ κατὰ λόγον δεσμῷ περιληφθεῖσαν; Ὡς, εἴ γε πάντα δεῖ ταῖς κατὰ φύσιν ῥοπαῖς χρῆσθαι καὶ φέρεσθαι καθ’ ὃ πέφυκε, μήθ’ ἥλιος κυκλοφορείσθω μήτε φωσφόρος μηδὲ τῶν ἄλλων ἀστέρων μηδείς· ἄνω γάρ, οὐ κύκλῳ τὰ κοῦφα καὶ πυροειδῆ κινεῖσθαι πέφυκεν. Εἰ δὲ τοιαύτην ἐξαλλαγὴν ἡ φύσις ἔχει παρὰ τὸν τόπον, ὥστ’ ἐνταῦθα μὲν ἄνω φαίνεσθαι φερόμενον τὸ πῦρ, ὅταν δ’ εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν παραγένηται, τῇ δίνῃ συμπεριστρέφεσθαι, τί θαυμαστὸν εἰ καὶ τοῖς βαρέσι καὶ γεώδεσιν ἐκεῖ γενομένοις συμβέβηκεν ὡσαύτως εἰς ἄλλο κινήσεως εἶδος ὑπὸ τοῦ περιέχοντος ἐκνενικῆσθαι; Οὐ γὰρ δὴ τῶν μὲν ἐλαφρῶν τὴν ἄνω φορὰν ἀφαιρεῖσθαι τῷ οὐρανῷ κατὰ φύσιν ἐστί, τῶν δὲ βαρέων καὶ κάτω ῥεπόντων οὐ δύναται κρατεῖν, ἀλλ’ ᾗ ποτ’ ἐκεῖνα δυνάμει, καὶ ταῦτα μετακοσμήσας ἐχρήσατο τῇ φύσει αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τὸ βέλτιον.

     13. If not a single one of the parts of the cosmos ever got into an ‘unnatural’ condition but each one is ‘naturally’ situated, requiring no transposition or rearrangement and having required none in the beginning either, I cannot make out what use there is of providence ⁹⁸ or of what Zeus, ‘the master-craftsman’ ⁹⁹ is maker and father-creator ¹⁰⁰. In an army, certainly, tacticians are useless if each one of the soldiers should know of himself his post and position and the moment when he must take and keep them. Gardeners and builders are useless too if here water all of itself ‘naturally’ moves to the things that require it and irrigates them with its stream, and there bricks and timbers and stones by following their ‘natural’ inclinations and tendencies assume of themselves their appropriate position and arrangement.

     If, however, this notion eliminates providence forthwith and if the arrangement of existing things pertains to God and the distributing of them too ¹⁰¹, what wonder is there that nature has been so marshalled and disposed that here in our region there is fire but the stars are yonder and again that earth is here but the moon is established on high, held fast by the bonds of reason which are firmer than the bonds of nature ¹⁰²? For, if all things really must follow their ‘natural’ inclinations and move with their ‘natural’ motions, you must order the sun not to revolve and Venus too and every other star as well, for light and fiery bodies move ‘naturally’ upwards and not in a circle ¹⁰³. If, however, nature includes such variation in accordance with location that fire, though it is seen to move upwards here, as soon as it has reached the heavens revolves along with their rotation, what wonder is there that the same thing has happened to heavy and earthy bodies that have got there and that they too have been reduced by the environment to a different kind of motion? For it certainly cannot be that heaven ‘naturally’ deprives light objects of their upward motion but is unable to master objects that are heavy and have a downward inclination; on the contrary, by whatever influence it rearranged the former it rearranged the latter too and employed the nature of both of them for the better.

     14. Οὐ μὴν ἀλλ’ εἴ γε δεῖ τὰς καταδεδουλωμένας ἕξεις… δόξας ἀφέντας ἤδη τὸ φαινόμενον ἀδεῶς λέγειν, οὐδὲν ἔοικεν ὅλου μέρος αὐτὸ καθ’ ἑαυτὸ τάξιν ἢ θέσιν ἢ κίνησιν ἰδίαν ἔχειν, ἣν ἄν τις ἁπλῶς κατὰ φύσιν προσαγορεύσειεν· ἀλλ’ ὅταν ἕκαστον, οὗ χάριν γέγονε καὶ πρὸς ὃ πέφυκεν ἢ πεποίηται, τούτῳ μέλλῃ παρέχειν χρησίμως καὶ οἰκείως κινούμενον ἑαυτὸ καὶ πάσχον ἢ ποιοῦν ἢ διακείμενον, ὡς ἐκείνῳ πρὸς σωτηρίαν ἢ κάλλος ἢ δύναμιν ἐπιτήδειόν ἐστι, τότε δοκεῖ τὴν κατὰ φύσιν χώραν ἔχειν καὶ κίνησιν καὶ διάθεσιν. Ὁ γοῦν ἄνθρωπος, ὡς εἴ τι τῶν ὄντων ἕτερον κατὰ φύσιν γεγονώς, ἄνω μὲν ἔχει τὰ ἐμβριθῆ καὶ γεώδη μάλιστα περὶ τὴν κεφαλήν, ἐν δὲ τοῖς μέσοις τὰ θερμὰ καὶ πυρώδη· τῶν δ’ ὀδόντων οἱ μὲν ἄνωθεν οἱ δὲ κάτωθεν ἐκφύονται καὶ οὐδέτεροι παρὰ φύσιν ἔχουσιν· οὐδὲ τοῦ πυρὸς τὸ μὲν ἄνω περὶ τὰ ὄμματα ἀποστίλβον κατὰ φύσιν ἐστὶ τὸ δ’ ἐν κοιλίᾳ καὶ καρδίᾳ παρὰ φύσιν, ἀλλ’ ἕκαστον οἰκείως καὶ χρησίμως τέτακται.

ναὶ μὴν κηρύκων τε λιθορρίνων

χελωνῶν τε καὶ παντὸς ὀστρέου φύσιν, ὥς φησιν ὁ Ἐμπεδοκλῆς, καταμανθάνων

ἔνθ’ ὄψει χθόνα χρωτὸς ὑπέρτατα ναιετάουσαν,

καὶ οὐ πιέζει τὸ λιθῶδες οὐδὲ καταθλίβει τὴν ἕξιν ἐπικείμενον, οὐδέ γε πάλιν τὸ θερμὸν ὑπὸ κουφότητος εἰς τὴν ἄνω χώραν ἀποπτάμενον οἴχεται, μέμικται δέ πως πρὸς ἄλληλα καὶ συντέτακται κατὰ τὴν ἑκάστου φύσιν.

     14. What is more, if we are finally to throw off the habits and opinions that have held our minds in thrall and fearlessly to say what really appears to be the case, no part of a whole all by itself seems to have any order, position, or motion of its own which could be called unconditionally ‘natural’ ¹⁰⁴. On the contrary, each and every such part, whenever its motion is usefully and properly accommodated to that for the sake of which the part has come to be and which is the purpose of its growth or production, and whenever it acts or is affected or disposed so that it contributes to the preservation or beauty or function of that thing, then, I believe, it has its ‘natural’ position and motion and disposition. In man, at any rate, who is the result of ‘natural’ process if any being is, the heavy and earthy parts are above, chiefly in the region of the head, and the hot and fiery parts are in the middle regions; some of the teeth grow from above and some from below, and neither set is ‘contrary to nature’; and it cannot be said that the fire which flashes in the eyes above is ‘natural’ whereas that in the bowels and heart is ‘contrary to nature’, but each has been assigned its proper and useful station. Observe, as Empedocles says ¹⁰⁵, the nature of

Tritons and tortoises with hides of stone

and of all testaceans,

Thou'lt see earth there established over flesh;

and the stony matter does not oppress or crush the constitution ¹⁰⁶ on which it is superimposed, nor on the other hand does the heat by reason of lightness fly off to the upper region and escape, but they have been somehow intermingled and organically combined in accordance with the nature of each.

     15. Ὥσπερ εἰκὸς ἔχειν καὶ τὸν κόσμον, εἴ γε δὴ ζῷόν ἐστι, πολλαχοῦ γῆν ἔχοντα πολλαχοῦ δὲ πῦρ καὶ ὕδωρ καὶ πνεῦμα, οὐκ ἐξ ἀνάγκης ἀποτεθλιμμένον ἀλλὰ λόγῳ διακεκοσμημένον. Οὐδὲ γὰρ ὀφθαλμὸς ἐνταῦθα τοῦ σώματός ἐστιν ὑπὸ κουφότητος ἐκπιεσθείς, οὐδ’ ἡ καρδία τῷ βάρει ὀλισθοῦσα πέπτωκεν εἰς τὸ στῆθος, ἀλλ’ ὅτι βέλτιον ἦν οὕτως ἑκάτερον τετάχθαι. Μὴ τοίνυν μηδὲ τῶν τοῦ κόσμου μερῶν νομίζωμεν μήτε γῆν ἐνταῦθα κεῖσθαι συμπεσοῦσαν διὰ βάρος, μήτε τὸν ἥλιον, ὡς ᾤετο Μητρόδωρος ὁ Χῖος, εἰς τὴν ἄνω χώραν ἀσκοῦ δίκην ὑπὸ κουφότητος ἐκτεθλῖφθαι, μήτε τοὺς ἄλλους ἀστέρας ὥσπερ ἐν ζυγῷ σταθμοῦ διαφορᾷ ῥέψαντας ἐν οἷς εἰσι γεγονέναι τόποις· ἀλλὰ τοῦ κατὰ λόγον κρατοῦντος οἱ μὲν ὥσπερ ‘ὄμματα φωσφόρα’ τῷ προσώπῳ τοῦ παντὸς ‘ἐνδεδεμένοι’ περιπολοῦσιν, ἥλιος δὲ καρδίας ἔχων δύναμιν ὥσπερ αἷμα καὶ πνεῦμα διαπέμπει καὶ διασκεδάννυσιν ἐξ ἑαυτοῦ θερμότητα καὶ φῶς, γῇ δὲ καὶ θαλάσσῃ χρῆται κατὰ φύσιν ὁ κόσμος, ὅσα κοιλίᾳ καὶ κύστει ζῷον· σελήνη δ’ ἡλίου μεταξὺ καὶ γῆς ὥσπερ καρδίας καὶ κοιλίας ἧπαρ ἤ τι μαλθακὸν ἄλλο σπλάγχνον ἐγκειμένη τήν τ’ ἄνωθεν ἀλέαν ἐνταῦθα διαπέμπει καὶ τὰς ἐντεῦθεν ἀναθυμιάσεις πέψει τινὶ καὶ καθάρσει λεπτύνουσα περὶ ἑαυτὴν ἀναδίδωσιν.

     Εἰ δὲ καὶ πρὸς ἄλλα τὸ γεῶδες αὐτῆς καὶ στερέμνιον ἔχει τινὰ πρόσφορον χρείαν, ἄδηλον ἡμῖν. Ἐν παντὶ δὲ κρατεῖ τὸ βέλτιον τοῦ κατηναγκασμένου. Τί γὰρ οὐχ οὕτως λάβωμεν, ἐξ ὧν ἐκεῖνοι λέγουσι, τὸ εἰκός; Λέγουσι δὲ τοῦ αἰθέρος τὸ μὲν αὐγοειδὲς καὶ λεπτὸν ὑπὸ μανότητος οὐρανὸν γεγονέναι, τὸ δὲ πυκνωθὲν καὶ συνειληθὲν ἄστρα· τούτων δὲ τὸ νωθρότατον εἶναι τὴν σελήνην καὶ θολερώτατον. Ἀλλ’ ὅμως ὁρᾶν πάρεστιν οὐκ ἀποκεκριμένην τοῦ αἰθέρος τὴν σελήνην, ἀλλ’ ἔτι πολλῷ μὲν τῷ περὶ αὐτὴν ἐμφερομένην, πολλὴν δ’ ὑφ’ ἑαυτὴν ἔχουσαν ἀνέμων … δινεῖσθαι καὶ κομήτας. οὕτως οὐ ταῖς ῥοπαῖς σεσήκωται κατὰ βάρος καὶ κουφότητα τῶν σωμάτων ἕκαστον, ἀλλ’ ἑτέρῳ λόγῳ κεκόσμηται”.

     15. Such is probably the case with the cosmos too, if it really is a living being ¹⁰⁷: in many places it has earth and in many fire and water and breath as the result not of forcible expulsion ¹⁰⁸ but of rational arrangement. After all, the eye has its present position in the body not because it was extruded thither as a result of its lightness, and the heart is in the chest not because its heaviness has caused it to slip and fall thither but because it was better that each of them should be so located. Let us not then believe with regard to the parts of the cosmos that earth is situated here because its weight has caused it to subside or that the sun, as Metrodorus of Chios ¹⁰⁹ once thought, was extruded into the upper region like an inflated skin by reason of its lightness or that the other stars got into their present positions because they tipped the balance, as it were, at different weights. On the contrary, the rational principle is in control; and that is why the stars revolve fixed like ‘radiant eyes’ ¹¹⁰ in the countenance of the universe, the sun in the heart’s capacity transmits and disperses out of himself heat and light as if it were blood and breath, and earth and sea ‘naturally’ serve the cosmos to the ends that bowels and bladder do an animal. The moon, situate between sun and earth as the liver or another of the soft viscera ¹¹¹ is between heart and bowels, transmits hither the warmth from above and sends upwards the exhalations from our region, refining them in herself by a kind of concoction and purification ¹¹².

     It is not clear to us whether her earthiness and solidity have any use suitable to other ends also. Nevertheless, in everything the better has control of the necessary ¹¹³. Well, what probability can we thus conceive in the statements of the Stoics? They say that the luminous and tenuous part of the ether by reason of its subtility became sky and the part which was condensed or compressed became stars, and that of these the most sluggish and turbid is the moon ¹¹⁴. Yet all the same anyone can see that the moon has not been separated from the ether but that there is still a large amount of it about her in which she moves and much of it beneath her in which they themselves as that the bearded stars and comets whirl. So it is not the inclinations consequent upon weight and lightness that have circumscribed the precincts ¹¹⁵ of each of the bodies, but their arrangement is the result of a different principle”.

     16. Λεχθέντων δὲ τούτων κἀμοῦ τῷ Λευκίῳ τὸν λόγον παραδιδόντος ἐπὶ τὰς ἀποδείξεις βαδίζοντα τοῦ δόγματος, Ἀριστοτέλης μειδιάσας “μαρτύρομαι” εἶπεν “ὅτι τὴν πᾶσαν ἀντιλογίαν πεποίησαι πρὸς τοὺς αὐτὴν μὲν ἡμίπυρον εἶναι τὴν σελήνην ὑποτιθεμένους, κοινῇ δὲ τῶν σωμάτων τὰ μὲν ἄνω τὰ δὲ κάτω ῥέπειν ἐξ ἑαυτῶν φάσκοντας· εἰ δ’ ἔστι τις ὁ λέγων κύκλῳ τε κινεῖσθαι κατὰ φύσιν τὰ ἄστρα καὶ πολὺ παρηλλαγμένης οὐσίας εἶναι τῶν τεττάρων, οὐδ’ ἀπὸ τύχης ἦλθεν ἐπὶ μνήμην ἡμῖν, ὥστ’ ἐμέ τε πραγμάτων ἀπηλλάχθαι καὶ … Λεύκιος “ἥκιστα, ὠγαθέ” εἶπεν, “ἀλλὰ τὰ ἄλλα μὲν ἴσως ἄστρα καὶ τὸν ὅλον οὐρανὸν εἴς τινα φύσιν καθαρὰν καὶ εἰλικρινῆ καὶ τῆς κατὰ πάθος ἀπηλλαγμένην μεταβολῆς τιθεμένοις ὑμῖν καὶ κύκλον ἄγουσιν ἀιδίου καὶ ἀτελευτήτου περιφορᾶς … οὐκ ἄν τις ἔν γε τῷ νῦν διαμάχοιτο, καίτοι μυρίων οὐσῶν ἀποριῶν· ὅταν δὲ καταβαίνων ὁ λόγος οὕτω θίγῃ τῆς σελήνης, οὐκέτι φυλάττει τὴν ἀπάθειαν ἐν αὐτῇ καὶ τὸ κάλλος ἐκείνου τοῦ σώματος· ἀλλ’ ἵνα τὰς ἄλλας ἀνωμαλίας καὶ διαφορὰς ἀφῶμεν, αὐτὸ τοῦτο τὸ διαφαινόμενον πρόσωπον πάθει τινὶ τῆς οὐσίας ἢ ἀναμίξει πως ἑτέρας ἐπιγέγονε· πάσχει δέ τι καὶ τὸ μιγνύμενον· ἀποβάλλει γὰρ τὸ εἰλικρινές, βίᾳ τοῦ χείρονος ἀναπιμπλάμενον.

     Αὐγῆς δὲ νώθειαν καὶ τάχους ἀμβλύτητα καὶ τὸ θερμὸν ἀδρανὲς καὶ ἀμαυρόν, ᾧ κατὰ τὸν Ἴωνα ‘μέλας οὐ πεπαίνεται βότρυς’, εἰς τί θησόμεθα πλὴν ἀσθένειαν αὐτῆς καὶ πάθος; Πόθεν οὖν πάθους ἀιδίῳ σώματι καὶ ὀλυμπίῳ μέτεστιν; Ὅλως γάρ, ὦ φίλε Ἀριστότελες, γῆ μὲν οὖσα πάγκαλόν τι χρῆμα καὶ σεμνὸν ἀναφαίνεται καὶ κεκοσμημένον, ὡς δ’ ἄστρον ἢ φῶς ἤ τι σῶμα θεῖον καὶ οὐράνιον δέδια μὴ ἄμορφος ᾖ καὶ ἀπρεπὴς καὶ καταισχύνουσα τὴν καλὴν ἐπωνυμίαν· εἴ γε τῶν ἐν οὐρανῷ τοσούτων τὸ πλῆθος ὄντων μόνη φωτὸς ἀλλοτρίου δεομένη περίεισι, κατὰ Παρμενίδην

ἀεὶ παπταίνουσα πρὸς αὐγὰς ἠελίοιο.

     Ὁ μὲν οὖν ἑταῖρος ἐν τῇ διατριβῇ τοῦτο δὴ τὸ Ἀναξαγόρειον ἀποδεικνύς, ὡς ἥλιος ἐντίθησι τῇ σελήνῃ τὸ λαμπρόν, ηὐδοκίμησεν· ἐγὼ δὲ ταῦτα μὲν οὐκ ἐρῶ, ἃ παρ’ ὑμῶν ἢ μεθ’ ὑμῶν ἔμαθον, ἔχων δὲ τοῦτο πρὸς τὰ λοιπὰ βαδιοῦμαι. Φωτίζεσθαι τοίνυν τὴν σελήνην οὐχ ὡς ὕελον ἢ κρύσταλλον ἐλλάμψει καὶ διαφαύσει τοῦ ἡλίου πιθανόν ἐστιν, οὐδ’ αὖ κατὰ σύλλαμψίν τινα καὶ συναυγασμόν, ὥσπερ αἱ δᾷδες αὐξομένου τοῦ φωτός· οὕτως γὰρ οὐδὲν ἧττον ἐν νουμηνίαις ἢ διχομηνίαις ἔσται πανσέληνος ἡμῖν, εἰ μὴ στέγει μηδ’ ἀντιφράττει τὸν ἥλιον, ἀλλὰ δίεισιν ὑπὸ μανότητος ἢ κατὰ σύγκρασιν εἰσλάμπει καὶ συνεξάπτει περὶ αὐτὴν τὸ φῶς. Οὐ γὰρ ἔστιν ἐκκλίσεις οὐδ’ ἀποστροφὰς αὐτῆς, ὥσπερ ὅταν ᾖ διχότομος καὶ ἀμφίκυρτος ἢ μηνοειδής, αἰτιᾶσθαι περὶ τὴν σύνοδον, ἀλλὰ κατὰ στάθμην, φησὶ Δημόκριτος ^β, ἱσταμένη τοῦ φωτίζοντος ὑπολαμβάνει καὶ δέχεται τὸν ἥλιον, ὥστ’ αὐτήν τε φαίνεσθαι καὶ διαφαίνειν ἐκεῖνον εἰκὸς ἦν. Ἡ δὲ πολλοῦ δεῖ τοῦτο ποιεῖν· αὐτή τε γὰρ ἄδηλός ἐστι τηνικαῦτα κἀκεῖνον ἀπέκρυψε καὶ ἠφάνισε πολλάκις, ‘ἀπεσκέδασεν δέ οἱ αὐγάς’, ὥς φησιν Ἐμπεδοκλῆς,

ἔς τε αἶαν καθύπερθεν, ἀπεσκνίφωσε δὲ γαίης
τόσσον, ὅσον τ’ εὖρος γλαυκώπιδος ἔπλετο μήνης,

καθάπερ εἰς νύκτα καὶ σκότος οὐκ εἰς ἄστρον ἕτερον τοῦ φωτὸς ἐμπεσόντος. Ὃ δὲ λέγει Ποσειδώνιος, ὡς ὑπὸ βάθους τῆς σελήνης οὐ περαιοῦται δι’ αὐτῆς τὸ τοῦ ἡλίου φῶς πρὸς ἡμᾶς, ἐλέγχεται καταφανῶς. Ὁ γὰρ ἀὴρ ἄπλετος ὢν καὶ βάθος ἔχων πολλαπλάσιον τῆς σελήνης ὅλος ἐξηλιοῦται καὶ καταλάμπεται ταῖς αὐγαῖς. Ἀπολείπεται τοίνυν τὸ τοῦ Ἐμπεδοκλέους, ἀνακλάσει τινὶ τοῦ ἡλίου πρὸς τὴν σελήνην γίνεσθαι τὸν ἐνταῦθα φωτισμὸν ἀπ’ αὐτῆς. Ὅθεν οὐδὲ θερμὸν οὐδὲ λαμπρὸν ἀφικνεῖται πρὸς ἡμᾶς, ὥσπερ ἦν εἰκὸς ἐξάψεως καὶ μίξεως δυοῖν φώτων γεγενημένης ἀλλ’ οἷον αἵ τε φωναὶ κατὰ τὰς ἀνακλάσεις ἀμαυροτέραν ἀναφαίνουσι τὴν ἠχὼ τοῦ φθέγματος αἵ τε πληγαὶ τῶν ἀφαλλομένων βελῶν μαλακώτεραι προσπίπτουσιν,

ὣς αὐγὴ τύψασα σεληναίης κύκλον εὐρύν

ἀσθενῆ καὶ ἀμυδρὰν ἀνάρροιαν ἴσχει πρὸς ἡμᾶς, διὰ τὴν κλάσιν ἐκλυομένης τῆς δυνάμεως”.

     16. With these remarks I was about to yield the floor to Leucius ¹¹⁶, since the proofs of our position were next in order; but Aristotle smiled and said: “The company is my witness that you have directed your entire refutation against those who suppose that the moon is for her part semi-igneous and yet assert of all bodies in common that of themselves they incline either upwards or downwards. Whether there is anyone, however, who says ¹¹⁷ that the stars move naturally in a circle and are of a substance far superior to the four substances here ¹¹⁸ did not even accidentally come to your notice, so that I at any rate have been spared trouble”. And Leucius broke in and said: “… good friend, probably one would not for the moment quarrel with you and your friends, dispute the countless difficulties involved, when you ascribe to the other stars and the whole heaven a nature pure and undefiled and free from qualitative change and moving in a circle whereby it is possible to have the nature of endless revolution too; but let this doctrine descend and touch the moon, and in her it no longer preserves the impassivity and beauty of that body. Not to mention her other irregularities and divergencies, this very face which she displays is the result of some alteration of her substance or of the admixture somehow of another substance ¹¹⁹. That which is subjected to mixture, however, is the subject of some affection too, for it loses its purity, since it is perforce infected by what is inferior to it.

     The moon’s sluggishness and slackness of speed and the feebleness and faintness of her heat which, in the words of Ion ‘ripes not the grape to duskiness’ ¹²⁰, to what shall we ascribe them except to her weakness and alteration, if an eternal and celestial ¹²¹ body can have any part in alteration? The fact is in brief, my dear Aristotle, that regarded as earth the moon has the aspect of a very beautiful, august, and elegant object; but as a star or luminary or a divine and heavenly object she is, I am afraid, misshapen, ugly, and a disgrace to the noble title, if it is true that of all the host in heaven she alone goes about in need of alien light ¹²², as Parmenides says

Fixing her glance forever on the sun ¹²³.

     Our comrade in his discourse ¹²⁴ won approval by his demonstration of this very proposition of Anaxagoras’s that ‘the sun imparts to the moon her brilliance’ ¹²⁵; for my part, I shall not speak about these matters that I learned from you or in your company but gladly proceed to what remains. Well then, it is plausible that the moon is illuminated not by the sun’s irradiating and shining through her in the manner of glass ¹²⁶ or ice ¹²⁷ nor again as the result of some sort of concentration of brilliance or aggregation of rays, the light increasing as in the case of torches ¹²⁸. Were that true, we should see the moon at the full on the first of the month no less than in the middle of the month, if she does not conceal and obstruct the sun but because of her subtility let his light through or as a result of combining with it flashes forth and joins in kindling the light in herself ¹²⁹. Certainly her deviations or aversions ¹³⁰ cannot be alleged as the cause of her invisibility when she is in conjunction, as they are when she is at the half and gibbous or crescent; then, rather, ‘standing in a straight line with her illuminant’, says Democritus, ‘she sustains and receives the sun’ ¹³¹, so that it would be reasonable for her to be visible and to let him shine thru. Far from doing this, however, she is at that time invisible herself and often has concealed and obliterated him ‘his beams she put to flight’, as Empedocles says,

From heaven above as far as to the earth, whereof
such breadth as had the bright-eyed moon, she cast in shade ¹³²,

just as if the light had fallen into night and darkness and not upon another star. As for the explanation of Posidonius that the profundity of the moon prevents the light of the sun from passing through her to us ¹³³, this is obviously refuted by the fact that the air, though it is boundless and has many times the profundity of the moon, is in its entirety illumined and filled with sunshine by the rays. There remains then the theory of Empedocles that the moonlight which we see comes from the moon’s reflection of the sun. That is why there is neither warmth ¹³⁴ nor brilliance in it when it reaches us, as we should expect there to be if there had been a kindling or mixture of the lights of sun and moon ¹³⁵. To the contrary, just as voices when they are reflected produce an echo which is fainter than the original sound and the impact of missiles after a ricochet is weaker,

Thus, having struck the moon’s broad disk, the ray ¹³⁶ 

comes to us in a refluence weak and faint because the deflection slackens its force”.

     17. Ὑπολαβὼν δ’ ὁ Σύλλας “ἀμέλει ταῦτ’” εἶπεν “ἔχει τινὰς πιθανότητας· ὃ δ’ ἰσχυρότατόν ἐστι τῶν ἀντιπιπτόντων, πότερον ἔτυχέ τινος παραμυθίας ἢ παρῆλθεν ἡμῶν τὸν ἑταῖρον”; “Tί τοῦτο” ἔφη “λέγεις”; Ὁ Λεύκιος· “ἦ τὸ πρὸς τὴν διχότομον ἀπορούμενον”; “Πάνυ μὲν οὖν” ὁ Σύλλας εἶπεν· “ἔχει γάρ τινα λόγον τὸ πάσης ἐν ἴσαις γωνίαις γινομένης ἀνακλάσεως, ὅταν ἡ σελήνη διχοτομοῦσα μεσουρανῇ, μὴ φέρεσθαι τὸ φῶς ἐπὶ γῆς ἀπ’ αὐτῆς ἀλλ’ ὀλισθάνειν ἐπέκεινα τῆς γῆς· ὁ γὰρ ἥλιος ἐπὶ τοῦ ὁρίζοντος ὢν ἅπτεται τῇ ἀκτῖνι τῆς σελήνης· διὸ καὶ κλασθεῖσα πρὸς ἴσας ἐπὶ θάτερον ἐκπεσεῖται πέρας καὶ οὐκ ἀφήσει δεῦρο τὴν αὐγήν· ἢ διαστροφὴ μεγάλη καὶ παράλλαξις ἔσται τῆς γωνίας, ὅπερ ἀδύνατόν ἐστιν”. “Ἀλλὰ νὴ Δί’” εἶπεν ὁ Λεύκιος “καὶ τοῦτ’ ἐρρήθη”. Καὶ πρός γε Μενέλαον ἀποβλέψας ἐν τῷ διαλέγεσθαι τὸν μαθηματικόν “αἰσχύνομαι μέν” ἔφη “σοῦ παρόντος, ὦ φίλε Μενέλαε, θέσιν ἀναιρεῖν μαθηματικὴν ὥσπερ θεμέλιον τοῖς κατοπτρικοῖς ὑποκειμένην πράγμασιν· ἀνάγκη δ’ εἰπεῖν ὅτι τὸ πρὸς ἴσας γίνεσθαι γωνίας ἀνάκλασιν πᾶσαν οὔτε φαινόμενον αὐτόθεν οὔθ’ ὁμολογούμενόν ἐστιν, ἀλλὰ διαβάλλεται μὲν ἐπὶ τῶν κυρτῶν κατόπτρων, ὅταν ἐμφάσεις ποιῇ μείζονας ἑαυτῶν πρὸς ἓν τὸ τῆς ὄψεως σημεῖον, διαβάλλεται δὲ τοῖς διπτύχοις κατόπτροις, ὧν ἐπικλιθέντων πρὸς ἄλληλα καὶ γωνίας ἐντὸς γενομένης ἑκάτερον τῶν ἐπιπέδων διττὴν ἔμφασιν ἀποδίδωσι καὶ ποιεῖ τέτταρας εἰκόνας ἀφ’ ἑνὸς προσώπου, δύο μὲν ἀντιστρόφους τοῖς ἔξωθεν ἀριστεροῖς μέρεσι, δύο δὲ δεξιοφανεῖς ἀλλ’ ἀμαυρὰς ἐν βάθει τῶν κατόπτρων.

     Ὧν τῆς γενέσεως τὴν αἰτίαν Πλάτων ἀποδίδωσιν. Εἴρηκε γὰρ ὅτι τοῦ κατόπτρου ἔνθεν καὶ ἔνθεν ὕψος λαβόντος ὑπαλλάττουσιν αἱ ὄψεις τὴν ἀνάκλασιν ἀπὸ τῶν ἑτέρων ἐπὶ θάτερα μεταπίπτουσαν. Εἴπερ οὖν τῶν ὄψεων εὐθὺς πρὸς ἡμᾶς … ἀνατρέχουσιν, αἱ δ’ ἐπὶ θάτερα μέρη τῶν κατόπτρων ὀλισθάνουσαι πάλιν ἐκεῖθεν ἀναφέρονται πρὸς ἡμᾶς, οὐ δυνατόν ἐστιν ἐν ἴσαις γωνίαις γίνεσθαι πάσας ἀνακλάσεις. Οἷς οἱ ὁμόσε χωροῦντες ἀξιοῦσιν αὐτοῖς τοῖς ἀπὸ τῆς σελήνης ἐπὶ γῆν φερομένοις ῥεύμασι τὴν ἰσότητα τῶν γωνιῶν ἀναιρεῖν, πολλῷ τοῦτ’ ἐκείνου πιθανώτερον εἶναι νομίζοντες. Οὐ μὴν ἀλλ’ εἰ δεῖ τοῦτο χαρίζεσθαι τῇ πολλὰ δὴ φίλῃ γεωμετρίᾳ καὶ δοῦναι, πρῶτον μὲν ἀπὸ τῶν ἠκριβωμένων ταῖς λειότησι συμπίπτειν ἐσόπτρων εἰκός ἐστιν, ἡ δὲ σελήνη πολλὰς ἀνωμαλίας ἔχει καὶ τραχύτητας, ὥστε τὰς αὐγὰς ἀπὸ σώματος μεγάλου προσφερομένας ὕψεσιν ἀξιολόγοις ἀντιλάμψεις καὶ διαδόσεις ἀπ’ ἀλλήλων λαμβάνουσιν, ἀνακλᾶσθαί τε παντοδαπῶς καὶ περιπλέκεσθαι καὶ συνάπτειν αὐτὴν ἑαυτῇ τὴν ἀνταύγειαν, οἷον ἀπὸ πολλῶν φερομένην πρὸς ἡμᾶς κατόπτρων. Ἔπειτα κἂν πρὸς αὐτῇ τῇ σελήνῃ τὰς ἀντανακλάσεις ἐν ἴσαις γωνίαις ποιῶμεν, οὐκ ἀδύνατον φερομένας ἐν διαστήματι τοσούτῳ τὰς αὐγὰς κλάσεις ἴσχειν καὶ περιολισθήσεις, ὡς συγχεῖσθαι καὶ κάμπτειν τὸ φῶς. Ἔνιοι δὲ καὶ δεικνύουσι γράφοντες, ὅτι πολλὰ τῶν φώτων αὐγὴν ἀφίησι κατὰ γραμμῆς ὑπὸ τὴν κεκλιμένην ὑποταθείσης· σκευωρεῖσθαι δ’ ἅμα λέγοντι διάγραμμα, καὶ ταῦτα πρὸς πολλούς, οὐκ ἐνῆν.

     17. Sulla then broke in and said: “No doubt this position has its plausible aspects; but what tells most strongly on the other side, did our comrade ¹³⁷ explain that away or did he fail to notice it”? “What's that”? said Leucius, “or do you mean the difficulty with respect to the half-moon”? “Exactly”, said Sulla, “for there is some reason in the contention that, since all reflection occurs at equal angles ¹³⁸, whenever the moon at the half is in mid-heaven the light cannot move earthwards from her but must glance off beyond the earth. The ray that then touches the moon comes from the sun on the horizon ¹³⁹ and therefore, being reflected at equal angles, would be produced to the point on the opposite horizon and would not shed its light upon us, or else there would be great distortion and aberration of the angle, which is opposite” ¹⁴⁰. “Yes, by Heaven”, said Leucius, “there was talk of this too”; and, looking at Menelaus the mathematician as he spoke, he said: “In your presence, my dear Menelaus, I am ashamed to confute a mathematical proposition, the foundation, as it were, on which rests the subject of catoptrics. Yet it must be said that the proposition, ‘all reflection occurs at equal angles’ ¹⁴¹, is neither self-evident nor an admitted fact ¹⁴². It is refuted in the case of convex ¹⁴³ mirrors when the point of incidence of the visual ray produces images that are magnified in one respect; and it is refuted by folding mirrors ¹⁴⁴, either plane of which, when they have been inclined to each other and have formed an inner angle, exhibits a double image, so that four likenesses of a single object are produced, two reversed on the outer surfaces and two dim ones not reversed in the depth of the mirrors.

     The reason for the production of these images Plato explains ¹⁴⁵, for he has said that when the mirror is elevated on both sides the visual rays interchange their reflection because they shift from one side to the other. So, if of the visual rays some revert straight to us from the plane surfaces while others glance off to the opposite sides of the mirrors and thence return to us again, it is not possible that all reflections occur at equal angles ¹⁴⁶. Consequently some people take direct issue with the mathematicians and maintain that they confute the equality of the angles of incidence and reflection by the very streams of light that flow from the moon upon the earth, for they deem this fact to be much more credible than that theory. Nevertheless, suppose that this ¹⁴⁷ must be conceded as a favour to geometry, the dearly beloved! In the first place, it is likely of the occur only in mirrors that have been polished to exact smoothness; but the moon is very uneven and rugged, with the result that the rays from a large body striking against considerable heights which receive reflections and diffusions of light from one another are multifariously reflected and intertwined and the refulgence itself combines with itself, coming to us, as it were, from many mirrors. In the second place, even if we assume that the reflections on the surface of the moon occur at equal angles, it is not impossible that the rays as they travel through such a great interval get fractured and deflected ¹⁴⁸ so as to be blurred and to bend their light. Some people even give a geometrical demonstration that the moon sheds many of her beams upon the earth along a line extended from the surface that is bent away from us ¹⁴⁹; but I could not construct a geometrical diagram while talking, and talking to many people too.

     18. Τὸ δ’ ὅλον” ἔφη “θαυμάζω πῶς τὴν διχότομον ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς κινοῦσιν ἐμπίπτουσαν μετὰ τῆς ἀμφικύρτου καὶ τῆς μηνοειδοῦς. εἰ γὰρ αἰθέριον ὄγκον ἢ πύρινον ὄντα τὸν τῆς σελήνης ἐφώτιζεν ὁ ἥλιος, οὐκ ἂν ἀπέλειπεν αὐτῆς σκιερὸν ἀεὶ καὶ ἀλαμπὲς ἡμισφαίριον πρὸς αἴσθησιν, ἀλλ’ εἰ καὶ κατὰ μικρὸν ἔψαυε περιών, ὅλην ἀναπίμπλασθαι καὶ δι’ ὅλης τρέπεσθαι τῷ φωτὶ πανταχόσε χωροῦντι δι’ εὐπετείας ἦν προσῆκον. Ὅπου γὰρ οἶνος ὕδατος θιγὼν κατὰ πέρας καὶ σταγὼν αἵματος εἰς ὑγρὸν ἐμπεσόντος ἀνέχρωσε πᾶν ἅμα … φοινιχθέν, αὐτὸν δὲ τὸν ἀέρα λέγουσιν οὐκ ἀπορροίαις τισὶν οὐδ’ ἀκτῖσι μεμιγμέναις ἀλλὰ τροπῇ καὶ μεταβολῇ κατὰ νύξιν ἢ ψαῦσιν ἀπὸ τοῦ φωτὸς ἐξηλιοῦσθαι, πῶς ἄστρον ἄστρου καὶ φῶς φωτὸς ἁψάμενον οἴονται μὴ κεράννυσθαι μηδὲ σύγχυσιν ποιεῖν δι’ ὅλου καὶ μεταβολὴν ἀλλ’ ἐκεῖνα φωτίζειν μόνον, ὧν ἅπτεται κατὰ τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν; Ὃν γὰρ ὁ ἥλιος περιιὼν κύκλον ἄγει καὶ περιστρέφει περὶ τὴν σελήνην, νῦν μὲν ἐπιπίπτοντα τῷ διορίζοντι τὸ ὁρατὸν αὐτῆς καὶ τὸ ἀόρατον, νῦν δ’ ἀνιστάμενον πρὸς ὀρθὰς ὥστε τέμνειν ἐκεῖνον ὑπ’ ἐκείνου τε τέμνεσθαι, ἄλλαις δὲ κλίσεσι καὶ σχέσεσι τοῦ λαμπροῦ πρὸς τὸ σκιερὸν ἀμφικύρτους καὶ μηνοειδεῖς ἀποδιδόντα μορφὰς ἐν αὐτῇ, παντὸς μᾶλλον ἐπιδείκνυσιν οὐ σύγκρασιν ἀλλ’ ἐπαφήν, οὐδὲ σύλλαμψιν ἀλλὰ περίλαμψιν αὐτῆς ὄντα τὸν φωτισμόν.

     Ἐπεὶ δ’ οὐκ αὐτὴ φωτίζεται μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δεῦρο τῆς αὐγῆς ἀναπέμπει τὸ εἴδωλον, ἔτι καὶ μᾶλλον ἰσχυρίσασθαι τῷ λόγῳ περὶ τῆς οὐσίας δίδωσιν. Αἱ γὰρ ἀνακλάσεις γίνονται πρὸς οὐδὲν ἀραιὸν οὐδὲ λεπτομερές, οὐδ’ ἔστι φῶς ἀπὸ φωτὸς ἢ πῦρ ἀπὸ πυρὸς ἀφαλλόμενον ἢ νοῆσαι ῥᾴδιον, ἀλλὰ δεῖ τὸ ποιῆσον ἀντιτυπίαν τινὰ καὶ κλάσιν ἐμβριθὲς εἶναι καὶ πυκνόν, ἵνα πρὸς αὐτὸ πληγὴ καὶ ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ φορὰ γένηται. Τὸν γοῦν αὐτὸν ἥλιον ὁ μὲν ἀὴρ διίησιν οὐ παρέχων ἀνακοπὰς οὐδ’ ἀντερείδων, ἀπὸ δὲ ξύλων καὶ λίθων καὶ ἱματίων εἰς φῶς τιθεμένων πολλὰς ἀντιλάμψεις καὶ περιλάμψεις ἀποδίδωσιν. Οὕτω δὲ καὶ τὴν γῆν ὁρῶμεν ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ φωτιζομένην· οὐ γὰρ εἰς βάθος ὥσπερ ὕδωρ οὐδὲ δι’ ὅλης ὥσπερ ἀὴρ διίησι τὴν αὐγήν, ἀλλ’ οἷος τὴν σελήνην περιστείχει κύκλος αὐτοῦ καὶ ὅσον ὑποτέμνεται μέρος ἐκείνης, τοιοῦτος ἕτερος περίεισι τὴν γῆν καὶ τοσοῦτον φωτίζων ἀεὶ καὶ ἀπολείπων ἕτερον ἀφώτιστον· ἡμισφαιρίου γὰρ ὀλίγῳ δοκεῖ μεῖζον εἶναι τὸ περιλαμπόμενον ἑκατέρας. Δότε δή μοι γεωμετρικῶς εἰπεῖν πρὸς ἀναλογίαν ὡς, εἰ τριῶν ὄντων οἷς τὸ ἀφ’ ἡλίου φῶς πλησιάζει, γῆς σελήνης ἀέρος, ὁρῶμεν οὐχ ὡς ὁ ἀὴρ μᾶλλον ἢ ὡς ἡ γῆ φωτιζομένην τὴν σελήνην, ἀνάγκη φύσιν ἔχειν ὁμοίαν ἃ τὰ αὐτὰ πάσχειν ὑπὸ τοῦ αὐτοῦ πέφυκεν”.

     18. Speaking generally”, he said, “I marvel that they adduce against us the moon’s shining upon the earth at the half and at the gibbous and the crescent phases too ¹⁵⁰. After all, if the mass of the moon that is illumined by the sun were ethereal or fiery, the sun would not leave her ¹⁵¹ a hemisphere that to our perception is ever in shadow and unilluminated; on the contrary, if as he revolves he grazed her ever so slightly, she should be saturated in her entirety and altered through and through by the light proceeding easily in all directions. Since wine that just touches water at its surface ¹⁵² or a drop of blood fallen into liquid at the moment of contact stains all the liquid red ¹⁵³, and since they say that the air itself is filled with sunshine not by having any effluences or rays commingled with it but by an alteration and change that results from impact or contact of the light ¹⁵⁴, how do they imagine that a star can come in contact with a star or light with light and instead of blending and producing a thorough mixture and change merely illumine those portions of the surface which it touches ¹⁵⁵? In fact, the circle which the sun in its revolution describes and causes to turn about the moon now coinciding with the circle that divides her visible and invisible parts and now standing at right angles to it so as to intersect it and be intersected by it, by different inclinations and relations of the bright part to the dark producing in her the gibbous and crescent phases ¹⁵⁶, conclusively demonstrates that her illumination is the result not of combination but of contact, not of a concentration of light within her but of light shining upon her from without.

     In that she is not only illumined herself, however, but also transmits to us the semblance of her illumination, she gives us all the more confidence in our theory of her substance. There are no reflections from anything rarefied or tenuous in texture, and it is not easy even to imagine light rebounding from light or fire from fire; but whatever is to cause a repercussion or a reflection must be compact and solid ¹⁵⁷, in order that it may stop a blow and repel it ¹⁵⁸. At any rate, the same sunlight that the air lets pass without impediment or resistance is widely reflected and diffused from wood and stone and clothing exposed to its rays. The earth too we see illumined by the sun in this fashion. It does not let the light penetrate its depths as water does or pervade it through and through as air does; but such as is the circle of the sun that moves around the moon and so great as is the part of her that it intercepts, just such a circle in turn moves around the earth, always illuminating just so much and leaving another part unlimited ¹⁵⁹, for the illumined portion of either body appears to be slightly greater than a hemisphere ¹⁶⁰. Give me leave then to put it in geometrical fashion in terms of a proportion. Given three things approached by the light from the sun: earth, moon, air; if we see that the moon is illumined not as the air is rather than as the earth, the things upon which the same agent produces the same effects must be of a similar nature” ¹⁶¹.

     19. Ἐπεὶ δὲ πάντες ἐπῄνεσαν τὸν Λεύκιον, “εὖ γ’” ἔφην “ὅτι καλῷ λόγῳ καλὴν ἀναλογίαν προσέθηκας· οὐ γὰρ ἀποστερητέον σε τῶν ἰδίων”. Κἀκεῖνος ἐπιμειδιάσας “οὐκοῦν” ἔφη “καὶ δεύτερον ἀναλογίᾳ προσχρηστέον, ὅπως μὴ τῷ τὰ αὐτὰ πάσχειν ὑπὸ τοῦ αὐτοῦ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ τῷ ταὐτὰ ποιεῖν ταὐτὸν ἀποδείξωμεν τῇ γῇ τὴν σελήνην προσεοικυῖαν. Ὅτι μὲν γὰρ οὐδὲν οὕτως τῶν περὶ τὸν ἥλιον γινομένων ὅμοιόν ἐστιν ὡς ἔκλειψις ἡλίου δύσει, δότε μοι ταύτης τῆς ἔναγχος συνόδου μνησθέντες, ἣ πολλὰ μὲν ἄστρα πολλαχόθεν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ διέφηνεν εὐθὺς ἐκ μεσημβρίας ἀρξαμένη, κρᾶσιν δ’ οἵαν τὸ λυκαυγὲς τῷ ἀέρι παρέσχεν. Εἰ δὲ μή, Θέων ἡμῖν οὗτος τὸν Μίμνερμον ἐπάξει καὶ τὸν Κυδίαν καὶ τὸν Ἀρχίλοχον, πρὸς δὲ τούτοις τὸν Στησίχορον καὶ τὸν Πίνδαρον ἐν ταῖς ἐκλείψεσιν ὀλοφυρομένους ‘ἄστρον φανερώτατον κλεπτόμενον’ καί ‘μέσῳ ἄματι νύκτα γινομένην’ καὶ τὴν ‘ἀκτῖνα τοῦ ἡλίου σκότους ἀτραπὸν ἐσσυμέναν’ φάσκοντας, ἐπὶ πᾶσι δὲ τὸν Ὅμηρον νυκτὶ καὶ ζόφῳ τὰ πρόσωπα κατέχεσθαι τῶν ἀνθρώπων λέγοντα καί ‘τὸν ἥλιον ἐξαπολωλέναι τοῦ οὐρανοῦ’ περὶ τὴν † σελήνην καὶ … τοῦτο γίνεσθαι πέφυκε

τοῦ μὲν φθίνοντος μηνὸς τοῦ δ’ ἱσταμένου.

     Τὰ λοιπὰ δ’ οἶμαι ταῖς μαθηματικαῖς ἀκριβείαις εἰς τὸν … ἐξῆχθαι καὶ βέβαιον, ὡς ἥ γε νύξ ἐστι σκιὰ γῆς, ἡ δ’ ἔκλειψις τοῦ ἡλίου σκιὰ σελήνης, ὅταν ἡ ὄψις ἐν αὐτῇ γένηται. Δυόμενος γὰρ ὑπὸ τῆς γῆς ἀντιφράττεται πρὸς τὴν ὄψιν, ἐκλιπὼν δ’ ὑπὸ τῆς σελήνης· ἀμφότεραι δ’ εἰσὶν ἐπισκοτήσεις, ἀλλ’ ἡ μὲν δυτικὴ τῆς γῆς ἡ δ’ ἐκλειπτικὴ τῆς σελήνης τῇ σκιᾷ καταλαμβανούσης τὴν ὄψιν. Ἐκ δὲ τούτων εὐθεώρητον τὸ γινόμενον. Εἰ γὰρ ὅμοιον τὸ πάθος, ὅμοια τὰ ποιοῦντα· τῷ γὰρ αὐτῷ τὰ αὐτὰ συμβαίνειν ὑπὸ τῶν αὐτῶν ἀναγκαῖόν ἐστιν. Εἰ δ’ οὐχ οὕτως τὸ περὶ τὰς ἐκλείψεις σκότος βύθιόν ἐστιν οὐδ’ ὁμοίως τῇ νυκτὶ πιέζει τὸν ἀέρα, μὴ θαυμάζωμεν· οὐσία μὲν γὰρ ἡ αὐτὴ τοῦ τὴν νύκτα ποιοῦντος καὶ τοῦ τὴν ἔκλειψιν σώματος, μέγεθος δ’ οὐκ ἴσον· ἀλλ’ Αἰγυπτίους μὲν ἑβδομηκοστόδυον οἶμαι φάναι μόριον εἶναι τὴν σελήνην, Ἀναξαγόραν δ’ ὅση Πελοπόννησος. Ἀρίσταρχος δὲ τὴν διάμετρον τῆς γῆς πρὸς τὴν διάμετρον τῆς σελήνης λόγον ἔχουσαν ἀποδείκνυσιν, ὃς ἐλάττων μὲν ἢ ἑξήκοντα πρὸς δεκαεννέα, μείζων δ’ ἢ ὡς ἑκατὸν ὀκτὼ πρὸς τεσσαράκοντα τρί’ ἐστίν.

     Ὅθεν ἡ μὲν γῆ παντάπασι τῆς ὄψεως τὸν ἥλιον ἀφαιρεῖται διὰ μέγεθος· μεγάλη γὰρ ἡ ἐπιπρόσθησις καὶ χρόνον ἔχουσα τὸν τῆς νυκτός· ἡ δὲ σελήνη κἂν ὅλον ποτὲ κρύψῃ τὸν ἥλιον, οὐκ ἔχει χρόνον οὐδὲ πλάτος ἡ ἔκλειψις, ἀλλὰ περιφαίνεταί τις αὐγὴ περὶ τὴν ἴτυν, οὐκ ἐῶσα βαθεῖαν γενέσθαι τὴν σκιὰν καὶ ἄκρατον. Ἀριστοτέλης δ’ ὁ παλαιὸς αἰτίαν τοῦ πλεονάκις τὴν σελήνην ἐκλείπουσαν ἢ τὸν ἥλιον καθορᾶσθαι πρὸς ἄλλαις τισὶ καὶ ταύτην ἀποδίδωσιν· ἥλιον γὰρ ἐκλείπειν σελήνης ἀντιφράξει, σελήνην δὲ … . Ὁ δὲ Ποσειδώνιος ὁρισάμενος οὕτω τόδε τὸ πάθος ‘ἔκλειψίς ἐστιν ἡλίου † σύνοδος σκιᾶς σελήνης ἧς τὴν ἔκλειψιν …’· ἐκείνοις γὰρ μόνοις ἔκλειψίς ἐστιν, ὧν ἂν ἡ σκιὰ τῆς σελήνης καταλαβοῦσα τὴν ὄψιν ἀντιφράξῃ πρὸς τὸν ἥλιον· ὁμολογῶν δὲ σκιὰν τῆς σελήνης φέρεσθαι πρὸς ἡμᾶς οὐκ οἶδ’ ὅ τι λέγειν ἑαυτῷ καταλέλοιπεν *** ἄστρου δὲ σκιὰν ἀδύνατον γενέσθαι· τὸ γὰρ ἀφώτιστον σκιὰ λέγεται, τὸ δὲ φῶς οὐ ποιεῖ σκιὰν ἀλλ’ ἀναιρεῖν πέφυκεν.

     19. When all had applauded Leucius, I said: “Congratulations upon having added to an elegant account an elegant proportion, for you must not be defrauded of what belongs to you”. He smiled thereat and said: “Well then proportion must be used a second time, in order that we may prove the moon to be like the earth not only because the effects of the same agent are the same on both but also because the effects of both on the same patient are the same. Now, grant me that nothing that happens to the sun is so like its setting as a solar eclipse. You will if you call to mind this conjunction recently which, beginning just after noonday, made many stars shine out from my parts of the sky ¹⁶² and tempered the air in the manner of twilight ¹⁶³. If you do not recall it, Theon here will cite us Mimnermus ¹⁶⁴ and Cydias ¹⁶⁵ and Archilochus ¹⁶⁶ and Stesichorus besides and Pindar ¹⁶⁷, who during eclipses bewail ‘the brightest star bereft’ ¹⁶⁸ and ‘at midday falling’ ¹⁶⁹ and say that the beam of the sun ‘is sped the path of shade’ ¹⁷⁰; and to crown all he will cite Homer, who says ‘the faces of men are covered with night and gloom’ ¹⁷¹ and ‘the sun has perished out of heaven’ ¹⁷² speaking with reference to the moon and hinting that this naturally occurs

When waning month to waxing month gives way ¹⁷³.

     For the rest, I think that it has been reduced by the precision of mathematics to the clear and certain formula that night is the shadow of earth ¹⁷⁴ and the eclipse of the sun is the shadow of the moon ¹⁷⁵ whenever the visual ray encounters it. The fact is that in setting the sun is screened from our vision by the earth and in eclipse by the moon; but are cases of occultation, but the vespertine is occultation by the earth and the ecliptic by the moon with her shadow intercepting the visual ray ¹⁷⁶. What follows from this is easy to perceive. If the effect is similar, the agents are similar, for it must be the same agents that cause the same things to happen to the same subject. Nor should we marvel if the darkness of eclipses is not so deep or so oppressive of the air as night is. The reason is that the body which produces night and that which produces the eclipse while the same in substance are not equal in size. In fact the Egyptians, I think, say that the moon is one seventy-second part (of the earth) ¹⁷⁷, and Anaxagoras that it is the size of the Peloponnesus ¹⁷⁸; and Aristarchus demonstrates that the ratio of the earth’s diameter to the diameter of the moon is smaller than 60 to 19 and greater than 108 to 43 ¹⁷⁹.

     Consequently the earth because of its size removes the sun from sight entirely, for the obstruction is large and its duration is that of the night. Even if the moon, however, does sometimes cover the sun entirely, the eclipse does not have duration or extension; but a kind of light is visible about the rim which keeps the shadow from being profound and absolute ¹⁸⁰. The ancient Aristotle gives this as a reason besides some others why the moon is observed in eclipse more frequently than the sun, saying that the sun is eclipse by interposition of the moon but the moon by that of the earth, which is much larger ¹⁸¹. Posidonius gave this definition: ‘The following condition is an eclipse of the sun, conjunction of the moon’s shadow with whatever parts of the earth it may obscure, for there is an eclipse only for those whose visual ray the shadow of the moon intercepts and screens from the sun’ ¹⁸²; —since he concedes then that a shadow of the moon falls upon us, he has left himself nothing to say that I can see. Of a star there can be no shadow, for shadow means the unlighted and light does not produce shadow but naturally destroys it ¹⁸³.

     20. Ἀλλὰ τί δή” ἔφη “μετὰ τοῦτο τῶν τεκμηρίων ἐλέχθη”; Κἀγώ “τὴν αὐτήν” ἔφην “ἐλάμβανεν ἡ σελήνη ἔκλειψιν”. “Ὀρθῶς” εἶπεν “ὑπέμνησας· ἀλλὰ δὴ πότερον ὡς πεπεισμένων ὑμῶν καὶ τιθέντων ἐκλείπειν τὴν σελήνην ὑπὸ τοῦ σκιάσματος ἁλισκομένην ἤδη τρέπωμαι πρὸς τὸν λόγον, ἢ βούλεσθε μελέτην ποιήσωμαι καὶ ἀπόδειξιν ὑμῖν τῶν ἐπιχειρημάτων ἕκαστον ἀπαριθμήσας”; “Νὴ Δί’” εἶπεν ὁ Θέων “τούτοις καὶ ἐμμελέτησον· ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ πειθοῦς τινος δέομαι, ταύτῃ μόνον ἀκηκοὼς ὡς ἐπὶ μίαν μὲν εὐθεῖαν τῶν τριῶν σωμάτων γιγνομένων, γῆς καὶ ἡλίου καὶ σελήνης, αἱ ἐκλείψεις συντυγχάνουσιν· ἡ γὰρ γῆ τῆς σελήνης ἢ πάλιν ἡ σελήνη τῆς γῆς ἀφαιρεῖται τὸν ἥλιον· ἐκλείπει γὰρ οὗτος μὲν σελήνης, σελήνη δὲ γῆς ἐν μέσῳ τῶν τριῶν ἱσταμένης· ὧν γίνεται τὸ μὲν ἐν συνόδῳ τὸ δ’ ἐν διχομηνίᾳ”. Καὶ ὁ Λεύκιος ἔφη “σχεδὸν μέντοι τῶν λεγομένων κυριώτατα ταῦτ’ ἐστί· πρόσλαβε δὲ πρῶτον, εἰ βούλει, τὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ σχήματος τῆς σκιᾶς λόγον· ἔστι γὰρ κῶνος, ἅτε δὴ μεγάλου πυρὸς ἢ φωτὸς σφαιροειδοῦς ἐλάττονα σφαιροειδῆ δὲ περιβάλλοντος ὄγκον. Ὅθεν ἐν ταῖς ἐκλείψεσι τῆς σελήνης αἱ περιγραφαὶ τῶν μελαινομένων πρὸς τὰ λαμπρὰ τὰς ἀποτομὰς περιφερεῖς ἴσχουσιν· ἃς γὰρ ἂν στρογγύλον στρογγύλῳ προσμῖξαν ἢ δέξηται τομὰς ἢ παράσχῃ, πανταχόσε χωροῦσαι δι’ ὁμοιότητα γίνονται κυκλοτερεῖς. Δεύτερον οἶμαί σε γινώσκειν, ὅτι σελήνης μὲν ἐκλείπει πρῶτα μέρη τὰ πρὸς ἀπηλιώτην, ἡλίου δὲ τὰ πρὸς δύσιν, κινεῖται δ’ ἡ μὲν σκιὰ τῆς γῆς ἐπὶ τὴν ἑσπέραν ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνατολῶν, ἥλιος δὲ καὶ σελήνη τοὐναντίον ἐπὶ τὰς ἀνατολάς.

     Ταῦτα γὰρ ἰδεῖν τε παρέχει τῇ αἰσθήσει τὰ φαινόμενα κἀκ λόγων οὐ πάνυ τι μακρῶν μαθεῖν ἔστιν· ἐκ δὲ τούτων ἡ αἰτία βεβαιοῦται τῆς ἐκλείψεως. Ἐπεὶ γὰρ ἥλιος μὲν ἐκλείπει καταλαμβανόμενος, σελήνη δ’ ἀπαντῶσα τῷ ποιοῦντι τὴν ἔκλειψιν, εἰκότως μᾶλλον δ’ ἀναγκαίως ὁ μὲν ὄπισθεν ἁλίσκεται πρῶτον ἡ δ’ ἔμπροσθεν. Ἄρχεται γὰρ ἐκεῖθεν ἡ ἐπιπρόσθησις, ὅθεν πρῶτον μὲν ἐπιβάλλει τὸ ἐπιπροσθοῦν· ἐπιβάλλει δ’ ἐκείνῳ μὲν ἀφ’ ἑσπέρας ἡ σελήνη πρὸς αὐτὸν ἁμιλλωμένη, ταύτῃ δ’ ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνατολῶν, ὡς πρὸς τοὐναντίον ὑποφερομένη. Τρίτον τοίνυν ἔτι τὸ τοῦ χρόνου λάβε καὶ τὸ τοῦ μεγέθους τῶν ἐκλείψεων αὐτῆς. Ὑψηλὴ μὲν ἐκλείπουσα καὶ ἀπόγειος ὀλίγον ἀποκρύπτεται χρόνον, πρόσγειος δὲ καὶ ταπεινὴ αὐτὸ τοῦτο παθοῦσα σφόδρα πιέζεται καὶ βραδέως ἐκ τῆς σκιᾶς ἄπεισι. Καίτοι ταπεινὴ μὲν οὖσα τοῖς μεγίστοις χρῆται κινήμασιν, ὑψηλὴ δὲ τοῖς ἐλαχίστοις· ἀλλὰ τὸ αἴτιον ἐν τῇ σκιᾷ τῆς διαφορᾶς ἔστιν. Εὐρυτάτη γὰρ οὖσα περὶ τὴν βάσιν, ὥσπερ οἱ κῶνοι, συστελλομένη τε κατὰ μικρὸν εἰς ὀξὺ τῇ κορυφῇ καὶ λεπτὸν ἀπολήγει πέρας. Ὅθεν ἡ σελήνη ταπεινὴ μὲν ἐμπεσοῦσα τοῖς μεγίστοις λαμβάνεται κύκλοις ὑπ’ αὐτῆς καὶ διαπερᾷ τὸ βύθιον καὶ σκοτωδέστατον, ἄνω δ’ οἷον ἐν τενάγει διὰ λεπτότητα τοῦ σκιεροῦ χρανθεῖσα ταχέως ἀπαλλάττεται. Παρίημι δ’ ὅσα χωρὶς ἰδίᾳ πρὸς τὰς βάσεις καὶ τὰς διαφορήσεις ἐλέχθη· καὶ γὰρ ἐκεῖναι μέχρι γε τοῦ ἐνδεχομένου προσίενται τὴν αἰτίαν· ἀλλ’ ἐπανάγω πρὸς τὸν ὑποκείμενον λόγον ἀρχὴν ἔχοντα τὴν αἴσθησιν.

     Ὁρῶμεν γὰρ ὅτι πῦρ ἐκ τόπου σκιεροῦ διαφαίνεται καὶ διαλάμπει μᾶλλον, εἴτε παχύτητι τοῦ σκοτώδους ἀέρος οὐ δεχομένου τὰς ἀπορρεύσεις καὶ διαχύσεις ἀλλὰ συνέχοντος ἐν ταὐτῷ τὴν οὐσίαν καὶ σφίγγοντος, εἴτε τῆς αἰσθήσεως τοῦτο πάθος ἐστίν, ὡς τὰ θερμὰ παρὰ τὰ ψυχρὰ θερμότερα καὶ τὰς ἡδονὰς παρὰ τοὺς πόνους σφοδροτέρας, οὕτω τὰ λαμπρὰ φαίνεσθαι παρὰ τὰ σκοτεινὰ φανερώτερα, τοῖς διαφόροις πάθεσιν ἀντεπιτείνοντα τὴν φαντασίαν. Ἔοικε δὲ πιθανώτερον εἶναι τὸ πρότερον· ἐν γὰρ ἡλίῳ πᾶσα πυρὸς φύσις οὐ μόνον τὸ λαμπρὸν ἀπόλλυσιν, ἀλλὰ τῷ εἴκειν γίνεται δύσεργος καὶ ἀμβλυτέρα· σκίδνησι γὰρ ἡ θερμότης καὶ διαχέει τὴν δύναμιν. Εἴπερ οὖν ἡ σελήνη πυρὸς εἴληχε βληχροῦ καὶ ἀδρανοῦς, ἄστρον οὖσα θολερώτερον, ὥσπερ αὐτοὶ λέγουσιν, οὐθὲν ὧν πάσχουσα φαίνεται νῦν, ἀλλὰ τὰ ἐναντία πάντα πάσχειν αὐτὴν προσῆκόν ἐστι, φαίνεσθαι μὲν ὅτε κρύπτεται, κρύπτεσθαι δ’ ὁπηνίκα φαίνεται· τουτέστι κρύπτεσθαι μὲν τὸν ἄλλον χρόνον ὑπὸ τοῦ περιέχοντος αἰθέρος ἀμαυρουμένην, ἐκλάμπειν δὲ καὶ γίνεσθαι καταφανῆ δι’ ἓξ μηνῶν καὶ πάλιν διὰ πέντε τῇ σκιᾷ τῆς γῆς ὑποδυομένην. Αἱ γὰρ πέντε καὶ ἑξήκοντα καὶ τετρακόσιαι περίοδοι τῶν ἐκλειπτικῶν πανσελήνων τὰς τέσσαρας καὶ τετρακοσίας ἑξαμήνους ἔχουσι τὰς δ’ ἄλλας πενταμήνους. Ἔδει τοίνυν διὰ τοσούτων χρόνων φαίνεσθαι τὴν σελήνην ἐν τῇ σκιᾷ λαμπρυνομένην· ἡ δ’ ἐν τῇ σκιᾷ μὲν ἐκλείπει καὶ ἀπόλλυσι τὸ φῶς, ἀναλαμβάνει δ’ αὖθις, ὅταν ἐκφύγῃ τὴν σκιάν, καὶ φαίνεταί γε πολλάκις ἡμέρας, ὡς πάντα μᾶλλον ἢ πύρινον οὖσα σῶμα καὶ ἀστεροειδές”.

     20. Well now”, he said, “which of the proofs came for this”? And I replied, “That the moon is subject to the same eclipse”. “Thank you”, he said, “for reminding me; but now shall I assume that you have been persuaded and do hold the moon to be eclipsed by being caught in the shadow and so turn straightway to my argument ¹⁸⁴, or do you prefer that I give you a lecture and demonstration in which each of the arguments is enumerated”? “By heaven”, said Theon, “do give these gentlemen a lecture. As for me, I want some persuasion as well, since I have only heard it put this way: when the three body, earth and sun and moon, get into a straight line, eclipses take place because the earth deprives the moon or the moon, on the other hand, deprives the earth of the sun, the sun being eclipsed when the moon and the moon when the earth takes the middle position of the three, the former of which cases occurs at conjunction and the latter at the middle of the month” ¹⁸⁵. Whereupon Leucius said, “Those soldier roughly the main points, though, of what is said on the subject. Add thereto first, if you will, the argument from the shape of the shadow. It is a cone, as is natural when a large fire or light that is spherical circumfuses a smaller but spherical mass ¹⁸⁶. This is the reason why in eclipses of the moon the darkened parts are outlined against the bright in segments that are curved ¹⁸⁷, for whenever two round bodies come into contact the lines by which either intersects the other turn out to be circular since they have everywhere a uniform tendency ¹⁸⁸. Secondly, I think that you are aware that of the moon the eastward parts are first eclipsed and of the sun the westward parts and that, while the shadow of the earth moves from east to west, the sun and the moon move contrariwise towards the east ¹⁸⁹.

     This is made visible to sense-perception by the phenomena and needs no very lengthy explanations to be understood, and these Philadelphia confirm the cause of the eclipse. Since the sun is eclipsed by being overtaken and the moon by encountering that which produces the eclipse, it is reasonable or rather it is necessary that the sun be caught first from behead and the moon from the front, for the obstruction begins from that point which the intercepting body first assails. The sun is assailed from the west by the moon that is striving after him, and she is assailed from the east by the earth's shadow that is sweeping down as it were in the opposite direction. Thirdly, moreover, consider the matter of the duration and the magnitude of lunar eclipses. If the moon is eclipsed when she is high and far from the earth, she is concealed for a little time; but, if the survey thing happens to her when she is low and near the earth, se is strongly curbed and is slow to get out of the shadow, although when she is low her exertions of motion are greatest and when she is high they are least. The reason for the difference lies in the shadow, which being broadest at the base, as cones are, and gradually contracting terminates at the vertex in a sharp and fine tip. Consequently the moon, if she has met the shadow when she is low, is involved by it in its largest circles ¹⁹⁰ and traverses its deep and darkest part; but above as it were in shallow water by reason of the fineness of the shadow she is just grazed and quickly gets clean away ¹⁹¹. I pass over all that was said besides with particular reference to the phases and variations ¹⁹², for these too, in so far as is possible ¹⁹³, admit the cause alleged; and instead I revert to the argument before us ¹⁹⁴ which has its basis in the evidence of the senses.

     We see that from a shadowy place fire glows and shines forth more intensely ¹⁹⁵, whether because the dark air being dense does not admit its effluences and diffusions but confines and concentrates the substance in a single place or because this is an affection of our senses that as hot things appear to be hotter in comparison with cold and pleasures more intense in comparison with pains so bright things appear conspicuous when compared with dark, their appearance being intensified by contrast to the different impressions ¹⁹⁶. The former explanation seems to be the more plausible, for in sunlight fire of every kind not only loses its brilliance but by giving way becomes ineffective and less keen, the reason being that the heat of the sun disperses and dissipates its potency ¹⁹⁷. If, then, as the Stoics themselves assert ¹⁹⁸, the moon, being a rather turbid star, has a faint and feeble fire of her own, she ought to have none of the things happen to her that now obviously do but the very opposite; she ought to be revealed when she is hidden and hidden whenever she is now revealed, that is hidden all the rest of the time when she is bedimmed by the circumambient ether ¹⁹⁹ but shining forth and becoming brilliantly clear at intervals of six months or again at intervals of five when she sinks under the shadow of the earth, since of 465 ecliptic full moons 404 occur in cycles of six months and the rest in cycles of five months ²⁰⁰. It ought to have been at such intervals of time then that the moon is revealed resplendent in the shadow, whereas in the shadow she is eclipsed and loses her light but regains it again as soon as she escapes the shadow ²⁰¹ and is revealed often even by day, which implies that she is anything but a fiery and star-like body".